Does Exodus 28:42 suggest that exposing the thighs exposes nakedness?

Question

I asked this on the Hermeneutics Stack Exchange but assume it's fine to ask here as well. Exodus 28:42 reads:

"וַעֲשֵׂה לָהֶם מִכְנְסֵי־בָד לְכַסּוֹת בְּשַׂר עֶרְוָה מִמׇּתְנַיִם וְעַד־יְרֵכַיִם יִהְיוּ׃"
"And you shall make for them linen trousers to cover their nakedness; they shall reach from the waist to the thighs."

Does the phrase "to the thighs" include the thighs? If so, does this verse teach that their clothing needed to cover all their thighs (i.e., be knee-length), or could they be midthigh?

The answer to this question could have implications for biblical examples of modesty. Thanks!

Answer 1

A nice question! Your problem stems from a mistranslation of "ערוה" here as "nakedness" rather than "private parts".

"ערוה" is indeed a very vague word (as Jastrow describes it), covering all kinds of physical and metaphorical "nakedness, shame; unchastity, lewdness, obscenity". However, in this specific case, it designates specifically male genitalia.

Here's a somewhat better translation:

"And you shall make for them linen trousers to cover their genitalia from the waist to the thighs."

Therefore, Cohen's boxers should cover the genitalia from מתניים (waist) to ירכים (thighs). No need to cover the thighs.

---

(Joel's comment): indeed Rambam MT Vessels of the Sanctuary.8.18? describes the trousers as going from under the heart to the end of the knees:

הַמִּכְנָסָיִם בֵּין שֶׁל כֹּהֵן גָּדוֹל בֵּין שֶׁל כֹּהֵן הֶדְיוֹט הֵם מִמָּתְנַיִם עַד יְרֵכַיִם שֶׁהוּא לְמַעְלָה מִן הַטִּבּוּר קָרוֹב מִן הַלֵּב עַד סוֹף הַיָּרֵךְ שֶׁהוּא הָאַרְכּוּבָה.

This is based on the Gemmarah Niddah.13b that describes fashion choice of the trousers:

"it is taught in a baraita: The trousers of priests, to what are they comparable? They are similar to riding trousers of horsemen, and this is what they look like: Above, they reach up to the loins; below, they go down to the thighs, and they have straps, and they have no opening, neither at the back nor at the front.

But I don't see that the extra parts relate to nakedness rather than the fashion style.

Answer 2

Based on references I've come across, it does appear that the command to cover "to the thighs" means to cover all the thighs, going knee-length. While a more Christian reference, The Pulpit Commentary says of the phrase “to the thighs” that it means “to the bottom of the thighs where they adjoin on the knee.” In addition, Chapter 8:18 of the following Jewish source provided by Joel K likewise describes the trousers as being knee-length. Unless there are sources to the contrary of these two, this verse clearly requires knee-length clothing in order to prevent nakedness, meaning that to expose the thighs would have exposed nakedness.