It is proper that a divorced woman and a widow as well should cover her head while saying Tehillim. Even if a Torah scholar permitted her to be lenient in a situation of great need, she should be careful to cover her head during the recitation.
Sources and Explanations
So wrote Rabbi Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Halichot Shlomo, Orchot Halachah, note 88). Regarding the obligation of a divorced woman and a widow to cover her hair, see the apparent contradiction in the words of the Shulchan Aruch. In Even HaEzer (21:2) he writes that every woman, even one who is unmarried, must cover her head: “Jewish women should not go out in the marketplace with uncovered heads, whether unmarried or married.” This is from the Rambam (Issurei Bi’ah, chapter 21, halacha 17). In Orach Chaim (75:2), however, he writes leniently regarding an unmarried woman: “The hair of a woman whose practice is to cover it, it is forbidden to recite opposite it; but maidens, whose practice is to go with uncovered heads, it is permitted.” The commentators set out to resolve the contradiction. The Prishah (ibid., ot 3) writes that the Tur’s intent is that a divorcee or a widow must cover her head, but maidens are permitted to go without a head covering. Therefore, when Maran the Shulchan Aruch writes stringently regarding an unmarried woman, he means an unmarried woman who is divorced or widowed. So too wrote the Beit Shmuel (Even HaEzer, ibid., se’if katan 5) and the Chelkat Mechokek (se’if katan 2), that the words of the Shulchan Aruch, who wrote “unmarried,” refer to a woman who had been married and was divorced or widowed. They write: “That is, a widow or a divorcee, but a maiden is permitted.” The poskim attest that the custom is that maidens go with uncovered heads (Pitchei Teshuvah 152:6, and Chatam Sofer, Nedarim 30b). Thus it emerges from all the above that a divorced woman and a widow should cover their heads properly.
However, we find that there are poskim who were lenient in their case where there is a great loss. See Igrot Moshe (Even HaEzer, vol. 1, siman 57), who writes that a woman’s obligation to cover her head depends on the two explanations of Rashi (Ketubot 72a, s.v. Azharah). In the first explanation he writes that there is a prohibition against not covering, while from the second explanation it is implied that it is a mitzvah upon her to go with a head covering. According to the first explanation, that it is a prohibition, this may not be permitted even where there is a great loss. But according to the second explanation, that it is only a mitzvah, the obligation of a mitzvah extends only up to a fifth, and therefore wherever there is a loss of a fifth of one’s assets, one is exempt. Indeed, Rashi concludes that the second explanation is the primary one. Therefore, where this woman cannot obtain a job to earn a livelihood for herself and her children, it is a case of duress, and she is not obligated.
One should not object that, if so, a married woman should also be permitted to uncover her head where there is a great loss. This is not so, for there is a great difference between them: a married woman is obligated to cover her head by Torah law, and therefore it must be forbidden to her even if she will lose all her money. But regarding a widow, where it is only Dat Yehudit (Jewish standards of modesty), one may be lenient in a case of doubt, for it is certainly no more stringent than a Rabbinic prohibition, where a doubt is treated leniently. Furthermore, it has not been the practice to forbid, where there is a loss, something that is forbidden due to Dat Yehudit.
However, we find poskim who disagreed with the words of the Igrot Moshe; see Yabia Omer (vol. 4, Even HaEzer), Machazeh Eliyahu (siman 119–120), Responsa Or Yitzchak (vol. 1, Even HaEzer, siman 3), and Responsa Lev Avraham (siman 107).
From the sefer “Shaf Veyativ – Laws of Saying Tehillim” by Rabbi Shay Tahan, Chapter 4: Laws Concerning Those Who Say Tehillim, Halacha 8 (p. 52 in the print edition). Translated from the Hebrew original.
