창세기 17:28의 Halakhah

The commandment to circumcise: [Parshat] Lekh Lekha [has] one positive commandment, and that is the commandment to circumcise; as it is stated (Genesis 17:10), "This is My covenant which you shall keep, between you and I, and with your descendants after you, circumcise all males." And [the commandment] is repeated in the Order of Eesha ki Tazria, as it is stated (Leviticus 12:3), "And on the eighth day circumcise the flesh of his foreskin." There are many commandments which are repeated in many places in the Torah; and all of them are necessary as the sages explained (Shabbat 132a and Shabbat 135a). And the content of this commandment is that we cut the foreskin that covers the head of the member and then tearing the sorting skin which is below it so that the glans of the member will be exposed. As is known to those that understand, the completion of the form of man comes with the removal of this foreskin which is extraneous.

The Imrei Yosher argues that this idea is reflected by the Midrash (Breishit Rabbah 47:9, commenting on Breishit 17:26) that states, "Rav Abba said, 'He suffered pain so that Hashem will double his reward.’" Rav Weinberg, though, counters that this Midrash merely demonstrates that Avraham Avinu desired the reward for the pain he had to endure for brit milah. It does not prove that there is an obligation to inflict pain on baby boys who do not intend to be rewarded for their pain.

Another interesting question arises with regard to circumcision. In female-to-male transformations a simulated male organ is often created by means of skin grafts and silicone forms. In some cases this effect is achieved by freeing the clitoris from its connective tissue. There is no question that this newly fashioned organ need not be circumcised. This is abundantly clear from the conclusion reached by She'elat Ya'avez, I, no. 171, in the discussion of a similar question arising with regard to a congenital defect. Yosef et Eḥav cites the comments of Yad Ne'eman, who maintains that circumcision would be unnecessary even if the new organ were physiologically similar to that of a male in every respect. In the opinion of the latter authority, the phraseology employed by Scripture, "uncircumcised male" (Gen. 17:13), applies solely to an individual who is a male at the time of birth.

All are fit to be an agent for betrothal except the deaf-mute,²¹In Jewish legislation deaf and dumb persons are frequently classed with minors and insane people and are considered unable to enter into some transactions requiring responsibility and will. The deaf-mute as well as the deaf or mute was not competent to be a witness to any transaction; for all testimony was given by word of mouth and the witnesses had to be able to hear the exhortation of the court. insane, and minor because they are lacking mental capacity, and the Gentile because he is not a son of the covenant²²This refers to one who is considered Jewish. The identifying mark of the male would be the circumcision. Circumcision is a religious rite performed on all male children of Jews on the eighth day after birth. It was commanded by God to Abraham (Gen. 17:10-14, Gen. 21:4) and his descendents as a “token of the covenant.” The penalty for non-observance was “Karet,” according to Rabbinic interpretation, a punishment by God. and the slave for he is not within the laws of betrothal. [Note: There are those who say that the first agent is able to appoint a second agent (Halachot, R. Mordechai Ben Hillel, Chapter “Hamekabel” in the name of some anonymous Rabbis) if he transmits to him the betrothal money or object that the owner transmitted to him, but if the owner did not transmit to him the betrothal money but only commanded him to betroth with any money he might want, he cannot appoint an agent. And there are those who say that in all cases the first agent cannot appoint a second agent (Hagahot Mordechai, Chapter Haish Mekadesh). If he sends a document through a non-Jew to an Israelite friend who is in another place and appoints him to be an agent to betroth him a woman there are those who say that the law is like in Gittin;²³Name of a treatise of the Mishnah, elaborated in the Palestinian and Babylonian Gemaras. It belongs to the third, out of six orders, “Nashim” (woman). While the name of the treatise signifies “documents” it is specifically applied to bills of divorce and only incidentally refers to other documents. and there are those who say that (as is explained below, Chapter 141) (Rabenu Yerucham) all agree that with regard to kidushin she is consecrated according to biblical law. (Thus it is written in Bet Yosef.)]

That is that He commanded us to circumcise a boy. And that is His, may He be exalted, saying to Avraham, "every male among you shall be circumcised" (Genesis 17:10) - and, after it, that whoever negates this commandment is liable for excision. And the regulations of this commandment have already been explained in Chapter 18 of Shabbat and 4 of Yevamot. But a woman is not commanded to circumcise her son, like the father is commanded about this - as is explained in Kiddushin (Kiddushin 29a). (See Parashat Lech Lecha; Mishneh Torah, Circumcision.)

And they, may their memory be blessed, also said (Mishnah Bikkurim 1:4) about this matter that converts bring them and recite, even though the land was not distributed to them. As it was given to Avraham first, and he was called "the father of many nations" (Genesis 17:4) - meaning to say that anyone who converts is considered like his son.