Abstract
Contemporary Jewish Americans are not a monolithic population; to the contrary, they are very diverse in religious beliefs and affiliations. Nevertheless, most seem to take for granted that their infant sons should be circumcised. With only the vaguest understanding of the traditional liturgy, and content to accept claims for medical or “hygienic” benefits, many choose circumcision by a physician for their infant sons, and have little or no interest in religious prescriptions. Even most of those who accept ritual circumcision have very little understanding of what happens or why. Although many circumcision liturgies have been extensively modified and “sanitized” nowadays, the traditional liturgy includes three features that might cause considerable unease if understood: biblical passages referring to wallowing in blood, human sacrifice, and a “peace pact” following a double murder. This paper explains the significance of the passages in their ritual context, then describes how authors of contemporary books addressed to mainstream audiences try to construct acceptable interpretations of the passages and justifications for continuation of the rite. Most Jewish Americans now say that they observe only those ritual practices (if any) that contribute to their “spiritual” welfare. If and when hospitals discontinue “routine” circumcisions, Jewish-American parents will need to decide whether to accept a ritual procedure that is so obviously inappropriate for life in contemporary America.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Glazer N. American Judaism, 2nd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 1972. pp. 545. Reform Jews in nineteenth-century Germany were sharply divided on whether or not to retain the practice. See Katz J. The struggle over preserving the rite of circumcision in the first part of the nineteenth century. In: Katz J. Divine Law in Human Hands: Case Studies in Halakhic Flexibility. Jerusalem: Magnes Press; 1998. pp. 320–56.
An extensive study conducted in 1995–96 among respondents self-identified as affiliated with a denomination yielded the following percentages; the first number refers to members of congregations, the second to non-members. Orthodox: 6, 2; Conservative: 18, 15; Reform: 16, 22; Other: 2, 19. Note that these percentage figures do not include the large numbers of non-affiliated persons. Note also that 58% of the respondents claiming “affiliation” do not actually belong to a congregation. Cohen SM. Assessing the vitality of Conservative Judaism in North America: evidence from a survey of synagogue members. In: Wertheimer J, editor. Jews in the Center: Conservative Synagogues and Their Members. New Brunswick (NJ) and London: Rutgers University Press; 2000. pp. 13–35. [here, p. 16.]
The most important aspect of recent American Jewish history has been the transformation of American Jews into Jewish Americans.“ Shapiro ES. A Time for Healing: American Jewry Since World War II. Baltimore and London: The Johns Hopkins University Press; 1992. p. 254.
For representative studies, see Wertheimer J. A People Divided: Judaism in Contemporary America. New York: Basic Books; 1993 and Heilman SC. Portrait of American Jews: The Last Half of the 20th Century. Seattle and London: University of Washington Press; 1995.
Cohen SM and AM Eisen. The Jew Within: Self, Family, and Community in America. Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press; 2000.
Cohen SM and AM Eisen. The Jew Within: Self, Family, and Community in America. Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press; 2000. pp. 7, 11.
I wrote to Arnold Eisen asking why there was no mention of circumcision. He sent a gracious reply, acknowledging that neither he nor Steven Cohen could explain their failure to include even one question, other than that they “simply forgot to do so.” Letter of 19 June 2001. Assuming (as I do) that this was a frank and honest answer, it is mystifying. These highly experienced scholars asked about such matters as participation in Jewish study groups, visiting Israel, candle lighting, and Christmas trees, but asked nothing about a universally recognized Jewish practice that has been controversial for more than a century. Although professional Jewish Studies scholars have to be cautious when discussing circumcision, including one or two questions among dozens would have implied nothing about personal beliefs. Is circumcision taken so thoroughly for granted that even those studying Jewish belief and practice never think to mention it?
In a study published in 1991, Steven M. Cohen reported that 55% of respondents to a survey said that they thought it “extremely important” that their grandsons be ritually circumcised, and another 18% called it “very important”—even though only 33% considered it “extremely important” that their children marry another Jew. Cited in Neusner J. Fortress Introduction to American Judaism. Minneapolis: Fortress Press; 1994. p. 45.
For a detailed analysis of the myth of Abraham’s covenant, see Hoffman LA. Covenant of Blood: Circumcision and Gender in Rabbinic Judaism. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press; 1996. chap. 2.
Hoffman LA. Covenant of Blood: Circumcision and Gender in Rabbinic Judaism. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press; 1996. p. 80. The quoted phrase is italicized in Hoffman’s text.
In a cross-cultural study of “reproductive rituals,” Karen and Jeffery Paige argue that circumcision “is a surveillance ritual by which members of a strong fraternal interest group [i.e., men united in a male-centered collective], particularly the most influential members, assess and minimize the likelihood of fission [i.e., departure from the collective unit] by requiring a public demonstration of loyalty of any man who has a son.” The father demonstrates that he is `willing to trust others with his and his family’s most valuable political asset, his son’s penis.“ Paige KE and JM Paige. The Politics of Reproductive Ritual. Berkeley, Los Angeles, and London: University of California Press; 1981. pp. 12266 [here, pp. 148–9, 147]. Note also their discussion of the ”ancient Hebrews,“ pp. 134–9.
Fathers and sons, not mothers and not daughters. As Hoffman demonstrates, the entire rite is characterized by “extreme sexist symbolism;” it is by and for men alone. Hoffman LA. Covenant of Blood: Circumcision and Gender in Rabbinic Judaism. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press; 1996. p. 210.
Hoffman LA. Covenant of Blood: Circumcision and Gender in Rabbinic Judaism. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press; 1996. pp. 69–73. His version of the rite is based on Birnbaum P. Daily Prayer Book: Ha-Siddur Ha-Shalem. New York: Hebrew Publishing Company; 1949. pp. 741–4, and Goldin FIE. Hamadrikh: The Rabbi’s Guide. Revised edition. New York: Hebrew Publishing Company; 1956. pp. 33–7, both of which I have also consulted. Krohn PJ. Bris Milah: Circumcision. Brooklyn, NY: Mesorah Publications, Ltd.; 1985. pp. 118–37. An authority on Jewish religious denominations characterizes Mesorah as “identified with right-wing Orthodoxy” and “arguably the largest publisher of Jewish books today.” Wertheimer J. A People Divided: Judaism in Contemporary America. New York: Basic Books; 1993. p. 120.
JPS Hebrew-English Tanakh. Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society; 1999.
Numbers 25: 10–12; JPS Hebrew-English Tanakh. Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society; 1999. p. 343.
The sandek,who is expected to be a “pious” man, may be the child’s grandfather, a relative, or perhaps a close family friend.
Translations differ in details; mine derives from Hoffman LA. Covenant of Blood: Circumcision and Gender in Rabbinic Judaism. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press; 1996. p. 71, and the three other sources cited in note 13. Erich Isaac, an anthropologist, has explained the connection between cutting animals or objects in half and confirming covenants or agreements. Isaac E. Circumcision as a covenant rite. Anthropos 1964; 59: 444–56.
See Hoffman LA. Covenant of Blood: Circumcision and Gender in Rabbinic Judaism. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press; 1996. p. 35. Jon Levenson revives this argument in a reactionary article in the “neo-conservative” periodical Commentary. Levenson JD. The new enemies of circumcision. Commentary 2000;109(3):29–36. [here, p. 35.] Levenson does not mention his own study of child sacrifice, cited in note 29 below.
Krohn PJ. Bris Milah: Circumcision. Brooklyn, NY: Mesorah Publications, Ltd.; 1985. pp. 118–9.
Numbers 25. JPS Hebrew-English Tanakh. Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society; 1999. pp. 343–4. The story appears to say that a branch of the Midianites were residing in Moabite territory and sharing their worship of Baal-peor.
Krohn PJ. Bris Milah: Circumcision. Brooklyn, NY: Mesorah Publications, Ltd.; 1985. p. 118.
Wolfson ER. Circumcision and the divine name: a study in the transmission of esoteric doctrine. Jewish Quarterly Review 1987;78:77–112. [here, pp. 102–3.] Moses’s wife was said to be the daughter of Jethro, a Midianite priest. I know of no text examining the question of whether this “intermarriage” contaminated his phallus.
Schachter L. Reflections on the Brit Mila ceremony. Conservative Judaism 1986; 38(4):38–41. [here, p. 40.]
JPS Hebrew-English Tanakh. Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society; 1999, p. 762. The passage is repeated in I Kings 19:13–14. Schachter cites I Kings 20, but this seems to be an error.
Schachter L. Reflections on the Brit Mila ceremony. Conservative Judaism 1986;38(4):38–41. [here, p. 41.]; author’s emphasis.
Hoffman LA. Covenant of Blood: Circumcision and Gender in Rabbinic Judaism. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press; 1996. pp. 112–21. [here, p. 121.]
Hoffman LA. Covenant of Blood: Circumcision and Gender in Rabbinic Judaism. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press; 1996. p. 120.
Krohn translates the phrase as “rescue the beloved…from destruction” - somewhat less accurate but to the point. The Hebrew term, shachat,means “pit.” Krohn PJ. Bris Milah: Circumcision. Brooklyn, NY: Mesorah Publications, Ltd.; 1985. p. 127.
Levenson JD. The Death and Resurrection of the Beloved Son: The Transformation of Child Sacrifice in Judaism and Christianity. New Haven: Yale University Press; 1993. pp. 43–52. For the possible connection with circumcision, see especially pp. 48–52. Orthodox Jews perform a rite called “Redemption of the First-Born” (pidyon ha-ben) on the 31st day of a male child’s life; the literal translation of pidyon is “ransom.” They pay a man supposedly descended from the priestly caste (a kohen) the equivalent of five ancient shekels (now interpreted as five silver dollars), ostensibly to commemorate the “redemption” of the boy from service in the Temple. Holding the coins over the child’s head, the kohen says, “This instead of that, this in exchange for that, this is given up for that.” Birnbaum P. Daily Prayer Book: Ha-Siddur Ha-Shalem. New York: Hebrew Publishing Company; 1949. pp. 751–2. Levenson translates the key term in the third phrase, machul,more accurately as “commutation” (p. 47)-hence, “this is commutation for that.” The biblical passage underlying the rite is as follows: “You shall give Me the first-born among your sons. You shall do the same with your cattle and your flocks; seven days it shall remain with its mother; on the eighth day you shall give it to me” (Exod. 22:28–29). Levenson observes that of all biblical passages that “have been deemed offensive, none has been deemed so more often than this one, and none has generated greater resistance to a literal interpretation” (p. 3); later he calls it “a hideous demand” (p. 17). Rabbi Daniel Gordis likens the rite to circumcision, repeating a comment to be quoted later in this paper: “it’s a reminder that we know the child isn’t really ours….In some powerful way, he is owned by the Jewish people.” Gordis D. Becoming a Jewish Parent. New York: Three Rivers Press; 1999. p. 300. He leaves readers to wonder about the “powerful way.”
Levenson JD. The Death and Resurrection of the Beloved Son: The Transformation of Child Sacrifice in Judaism and Christianity. New Haven: Yale University Press; 1993. p. 13. A penetrating study by Carol Delaney explains the thematic connection between Abraham’s circumcision and his willingness to sacrifice Isaac. Delaney C. Abraham on Trial: The Social Legacy of Biblical Myth. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press; 1998.
Levenson JD. The Death and Resurrection of the Beloved Son: The Transformation of Child Sacrifice in Judaism and Christianity. New Haven: Yale University Press; 1993. chap. 2. Day J. Molech: A God of Human Sacrifice from the Old Testament. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1989. Generally accepted biblical references include Lev.18:21, Lev. 20:2–5, Jer. 7:31, Jer. 19:5, Jer. 32:35, II Kings 23: 10.
Day J. Molech: A God of Human Sacrifice from the Old Testament. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1989, chap. 2 and pp. 83–4. He suggests that the name Hinnom is related to Gehenna,a term close in meaning to Sheol.
Levenson JD. The Death and Resurrection of the Beloved Son: The Transformation of Child Sacrifice in Judaism and Christianity. New Haven: Yale University Press; 1993. p. 18. That conclusion is seconded by Susan Niditch: “While there is still considerable controversy about the matter…the consensus of scholars over the last decade concludes that child sacrifice was a part of ancient Israelite religion, to large segments of Israelite communities of various periods.” Niditch S. War in the Hebrew Bible. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1993. p. 47.
Jer. 7:30–31, 19:5. JPS Hebrew-English Tanakh. Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society; 1999. pp. 1026, 1057.
Levenson JD. The Death and Resurrection of the Beloved Son: The Transformation of Child Sacrifice in Judaism and Christianity. New Haven: Yale University Press; 1993. pp. 50–2.
Ezekiel 16:3–9, 14. JPS Hebrew-English Tanakh. Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society; 1999. p. 1181.
Friedlander G, editor and translator. Pirkei de Rabbi Eliezer. New York: Benjamin Blom; 1971. p. 204.
Friedlander G, editor and translator. Pirkei de Rabbi Eliezer. New York: Benjamin Blom; 1971. p. 210. Parentheses in original.
Hoffman LA. Covenant of Blood: Circumcision and Gender in Rabbinic Judaism. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press; 1996. pp. 38–9, 109.
Hoffman LA. Covenant of Blood: Circumcision and Gender in Rabbinic Judaism. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press; 1996. p. 91; his emphasis. Hoffman suggests that Jews may be reluctant to recognize the association of wine with blood for two reasons: Christian symbolism associated with the “Last Supper” and medieval accusations that Jews required the blood of Christian boys for Passover matzah (pp. 90–1 ).
Eilberg-Schwartz H. The Savage in Judaism: An Anthropology of Israelite Religion and Ancient Judaism. Bloomington (IN): Indiana University Press; 1990. chap. 6.
In a book to be discussed briefly in note 53 below, Jacob Neusner comments that few Jewish Americans understand the circumcision liturgy or care about having it performed with strict correctness; most prefer “to do it [i.e., go through with the child’s circumcision] with their eyes closed.” Neusner J. Fortress Introduction to American Judaism. Minneapolis: Fortress Press; 1994. pp. 78–86. [here, p. 79.]
Yet another question comes to mind: Why must the infant be circumcised on the eighth day after birth? (This means one week later, since the day of birth is counted as first of the eight.) The answer, in brief, is that in the rabbinic system of thought, male blood is sacred and pure, while female blood, as shed during menstruation and childbirth, is the ultimate pollution. Hence, the child must wait for a week until it has been cleansed of maternal blood. In Leviticus 12:2–5, a verse mandating circumcision on the eighth day is inserted into a text on cleansing of women and “blood purification” after childbirth. Archer U. Bound by blood: circumcision and menstrual taboo in post-exilic Judaism. In: Soskice JM, editor. After Eve. London: Collins Marshall Pickering; 1990. pp. 38–61. Another possible interpretation would focus on the command that first-born sons be redeemed on the eighth day, as discussed above, note 29.
For more on the Berit Mila Board, see Glick LB. Jewish circumcision: an enigma in historical perspective. In: Denniston GC, Hodges FM, and Milos MF, editors. Understanding Circumcision: A Multi-Disciplinary Approach to a Multi-Dimensional Problem. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers; 2001. pp. 19–54. [here, pp. 457.]
Diamant A. The Jewish Baby Book. New York: Summit Books; 1988. pp. 18–9.
Diamant A. The Jewish Baby Book. New York: Summit Books; 1988. pp. 105, 107–8.
Diamant A. The Jewish Baby Book. New York: Summit Books; 1988. pp. 111–3.
Diamant A. The Jewish Baby Book. New York: Summit Books; 1988. pp. 115–6. Diamant offers several versions of the liturgy. Her standard version (pp. 124–7) includes the passages on rescue from the pit (sanitized to “protect this child from all misfortune”) and on wallowing in blood (“Because of your blood you shall live!”). She also offers two “new liturgies” (pp. 133–41). The second speaks entirely in comfortable platitudes: love, compassion, harmony, and so on, ignoring the question of how these might be nurtured by removal of infant foreskins.
Neusner J. The Enchantments of Judaism: Rites of Transformation from Birth through Death. New York: Basic Books; 1987. pp. 5–6.
Neusner J. The Enchantments of Judaism: Rites of Transformation from Birth through Death. New York: Basic Books; 1987. pp. 43–5.
Neusner J. The Enchantments of Judaism: Rites of Transformation from Birth through Death. New York: Basic Books; 1987. p. 46.
Neusner J. The Enchantments of Judaism: Rites of Transformation from Birth through Death. New York: Basic Books; 1987. pp. 50–1. Although the word “cut” sounds like an unfortunate choice here, it recalls the biblical term “to cut a covenant,” mentioned in note 17 above.
Neusner J. The Enchantments of Judaism: Rites of Transformation from Birth through Death. New York: Basic Books; 1987. p. 52; “the here and the now” sic. In an introductory book published a few years later by a Christian press and addressed mainly to non-Jewish readers, Neusner explained that the “enchantments” book answered the question of how Jewish rituals “work” to achieve “transformation.” The section on circumcision (pp. 78–86) repeats some material from the earlier book and seems equally disturbing. Performing this “blood rite” in a “religious setting,” Neusner says, “makes people (particularly males) confront the stark, naked reality of the faith — blood and flesh and all.” He acknowledges, however, that many Jewish Americans “find implausible the message of the liturgy” and simply want to get the business done with minimal personal involvement. He concludes on a mystifying note: Since the European Jewish past came to an end with the Holocaust, for Jewish Americans “there is no past, except in rite. So why should blood repel, when blood is all there is, and when, after all, it all ended in blood….The blood of the covenant is right and true: the covenant really was, and remains, a covenant of blood, in all senses and aspects.” Neusner J. Fortress Introduction to American Judaism. Minneapolis: Fortress Press; 1994. [here, pp. viii-ix, 78, 86.]
Note that the parents in Diamant’s book are also “dazed.” Sander L. Gilman has pointed out that Europeans viewed Jewish men as “uncanny, in that they superficially appear to be males but are not because of the altered form of the genitalia.” Jewish men were thought to be weakened and emasculated. Gilman quotes Freud: “Circumcision is unconsciously equated with castration.” Gilman SL. Freud, Race, and Gender. Princeton (NJ): Princeton University Press; 1993. Chapter 2: The construction of the male Jew. [here, pp. 49, 83.]
Gordis D. Becoming a Jewish Parent. New York: Three Rivers Press, 1999; pp. 295–6. I think Gordis defines his affiliation as Conservative, but I’m not certain.
Gordis D. Becoming a Jewish Parent. New York: Three Rivers Press, 1999; pp. 297–9; his emphasis and his spelling of brit.
Malka R. Rabbi Malka’s Brit Milah Page—Mazel Toy. http://look.net/ForYou/malka/. p. 1; his emphasis. The text has “hygeinic.”
Malka R. Rabbi Malka’s Brit Milah Page—Mazel Tov. http://look.net/ForYou/malka/. pp. 2–4; his emphasis.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2004 Springer Science+Business Media New York
About this paper
Cite this paper
Glick, L.B. (2004). “Something Less Than Joyful”. In: Denniston, G.C., Hodges, F.M., Milos, M.F. (eds) Flesh and Blood. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-4011-0_12
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-4011-0_12
Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA
Print ISBN: 978-1-4419-3446-8
Online ISBN: 978-1-4757-4011-0
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive