Tzeniut

The prophet Micha distills our obligations to God into three core ideas:

Justice (mishpat) and kindness (chesed) appear frequently throughout the Tanach, often in tension with each other because strict justice is not necessarily kind.¹ When we mention one, we expect to see the other, so that they can balance each other out. God exemplifies both qualities, and we are bound to emulate the Divine.

But what is the third element, hatzne’a lechet, walking modestly? The Hebrew root tzadi.nun.ayin, denoting hiddenness, discretion, or modesty, appears only twice in Tanach,² making the expression all the more difficult to interpret.

What does it mean to “walk modestly” with God? What do these words add to the qualities of doing justice and loving kindness?

Let’s begin with the idea that tzeniut is oriented toward the physical. Sefer Mitzvot Katan (Semak), one of the early codifiers of mitzvot, takes this approach. In Mitzva 57, he connects the verse in Micha with one from Devarim:

This verse does not mention the root tzadi.nun.ayin, but does convey related ideas. The verse is understood to prohibit men or women from uttering God’s name in the presence of an ervat davar, matter of nakedness. Our sages teach that erva here refers to fully exposed genitalia.³ Rabbinic law extends this prohibition to other body parts or types of exposure.⁴ Semak codifies this element of the verse in a distinct mitzva (Mitzva 83).⁵

Beyond the specific application of this verse to covering erva, we learn from it that God’s immanent presence among us depends on our sanctity, which depends in turn on sometimes separating ourselves from the animalistic. One way to preserve holiness is to draw boundaries, keeping some matters private, or hidden from the eye, much as God, the source of holiness, keeps elements of the Divine concealed from human view.

Micha states specifically that we are to walk modestly with God . By creating a real boundary between our spiritual selves and some of our natural behaviors or states, we can set ourselves apart from our physical surroundings, too, and acknowledge that we are more than creatures of nature, and that we stand before God.⁶

Semak elaborates on this idea, calling this type of boundary-drawing a mitzva of being tzanua.

It is at our most physical moments, as when we are occupied with sexual or excretory functions, that we are most at risk of breaching boundaries and losing sight of our own sanctity, of what distinguishes us from the animal. Keeping those moments private, and modest as appropriate even when in private,⁷ keeps us oriented to the holy.

When Semak hints here at a wider mandate to be tzanua “in every matter,” it is not clear just how broadly he intends it. Since he counts not revealing erva as a distinct mitzva, he likely only means here that we must – as a matter of halacha – be conscious in every situation of relating to our physical discharges in a way that reflects our sanctity.

Unlike Semak, the other early codifiers of mitzvot do not list tzeniut as a separate mitzva, though they still make note of strictures he lists. Approaching tzeniut in this way indicates that it is less a single halacha concerned with physicality than a general description of the way life should be lived and mitzvot should be performed.

This interpretation of tzeniut derives from the Talmud’s discussion of the verse in Micha:

Rashi explains that Rabbi Elazar applied “hatzne’a lechet” to escorting the bride or the deceased because of a verse in Kohelet that also contains the word “lechet,” with reference to houses of rejoicing and of mourning.

According to this reading of Rabbi Elazar, tzeniut is humbly shying away from publicity or excess. The prophet tells us to do even public mitzvot in a more private and measured manner.

This passage brings to mind Alice Roosevelt’s jibe at her father, Theodore, that he “always wanted to be the corpse at every funeral, the bride at every wedding, and the baby at every christening.”  A person might act with justice or kindness, but with an excessive relish for center stage that lacks tzeniut.

Rav Yehoshua ibn Shu’eib (a student of Rashba, 14th century Spain) clarifies this idea:

We learn from the verse in Micha that the quality of tzeniut is “not an independent mitzva” but should govern our performance of all mitzvot, whether they be mitzvot that are marked by justice or by lovingkindness.

In modern terms, we might think of tzeniut as the inverse of narcissism.⁸ Performing mitzvot is not about the ego. By keeping even our mitzva acts reasonably private, we help ensure that we act out of concern for God, and not in order to impress others.

A Combination

What difference does it make if we treat tzeniut as a mitzva or as a general religious principle? If we focus on the physical or conceptual? Either way, shouldn’t tzeniut pervade our actions?

Private modesty standards are not fully identical to those in public. Still, our every act must be informed by a humble awareness of the Divine presence, and reflect that we are first and foremost servants of God.⁹

While tzeniut would be significant in either case, a more physical, mitzva-oriented approach to tzeniut tends to be more technical or action-oriented, and might lead us to lose sight of its conceptual meaning.

On the other hand, many people struggle to take halachic principles as seriously as formal, clearly-defined mitzvot. By counting tzeniut as its own mitzva, Semak indicates that no matter how wide-reaching the concept of tzeniut is, it is not only an ideal. Tzanua behavior can be fully obligatory.

Rabbanit Michal Tikochinsky explains that tzeniut is both principle and mitzva, and for that reason too pervasive to be confined to any one legal category.¹⁰

Even if tzeniut is not a distinct mitzva, many behaviors we may characterize as modest fall within other halachic definitions. Combining different approaches to tzeniut into a single, overarching pursuit means viewing tzeniut as a guiding principle, while maintaining an awareness that this principle often leads to specific obligations, which tend to be physical in nature.

By drawing contextually-sensitive boundaries around our self-exposure, around our physicality and our expressions of ego, we can build relationships with God and others that reflect our inner sanctity and leave room for theirs.

Just as keeping a mitzva act more private does not suggest that we are ashamed of it, other acts of limiting self-exposure and moving away from impressing others are not signs of shame.

The second mention of tzeniut in Tanach contrasts acting in accordance with the principle of tzeniut with brazen behaviors that lead to shame:

In his explanation of this verse, Maharal takes this idea a step further and associates tzeniut with the opposite of shame, honor:

When people conduct themselves with tzeniut, they wisely respect their own boundaries and those of others, and thus engender respect. They do not foist their accomplishments or their neediness on others for effect. They expose themselves only as necessary, without needing to take up or dictate the social space.

Rav Norman Lamm expands on the link between self-respect and tzeniut, and on the personal and interpersonal nature of each.

Tzeniut allows us to focus on the essential. When we cease showing off to or competing with others, we allow for religious ethics— not externals— to define our interactions.

Rabbanit Dina Cohen adds that an interpersonal perspective on tzeniut, based on genuine concern and respect for the other, can be an important corrective to materialism or exhibitionism.

As a corollary to the concern that every Jew act with sexual propriety, there often seems to be a great focus specifically on women and tzeniut. The midrash even suggests that, at every stage of creation, God restates to woman that she should be tzenua:

This midrash is of particular interest because it describes a point in time that precedes society or eating the forbidden fruit. It points to an inherent concern about women’s tzeniut before God, irrespective of what other humans might perceive.

Why should this be the case? The focus on women’s tzeniut seems to derive from the two primary aspects of tzeniut we’ve discussed. Traditional sources express concerns about women’s physicality and sexuality that contribute to questions raised about women taking on public roles. These concerns also lead to discussion of men’s halachic responsibility in viewing women with respect.

Although some traditions or halachot with regard to tzeniut relate to men and women differently, and the emphasis on women’s tzeniut is often stronger, tzeniut still applies to everyone. Meiri makes this point:

Surprisingly, a verse from Tehillim that is often quoted to convey the distinct value of women’s tzeniut helps support this point as well.

The verse teaches that honor is internal. It is also sometimes taken to mean that women are dishonored by certain types of public exposure.¹² This very verse is also applied, in some versions of the midrash, to Moshe Rabbeinu and to Aharon Ha-Kohen.

God confines his communication with Moshe to the tent of meeting out of concern for tzeniut! Tzeniut is a priority even for Moshe Rabbeinu, even when interacting directly with God.

While “kol kevudah bat melech penima” has special resonance for women, and classic discussions of tzeniut accordingly exhort women to take on more private than public roles,¹³ the verse and its meaning, like tzeniut as a whole, is not at all limited to women.¹⁴