"May the Merciful One bless the circumciser of the flesh
of the milah, who draws back [the orlah] and who sucks the
blood of the milah. The service of someone who is afraid or
faint hearted is invalid, if he fails to perform these three
tasks" (from the Horachamon prayer added after the
meal celebrating a bris).
The Orthodox community has lately been fighting an attempt to
introduce changes into the way bris milah is
performed. The effort to do so has involved the general press
and appeals to gentile authorities. HaRav Eliashiv's clear
statement of halochoh on the matter is intended to put an end
to this and similar attempts to change the universally
accepted procedure for bris milah that has been
followed for generations.
Throughout history, our nation has been harshly attacked
numerous times for our steadfastness in observing our mitzvos
and customs. Some of the enemies of our customs have even
issued from our own ranks. They justify their efforts by
claiming that they act in the name of culture and modernity,
while hoodwinking the general public into believing that they
have a mandate for their actions in a so-called halachic
concept of "a need of the times."
The latest storm involves the American Torah world and
general Orthodox community and an attempt by several Jewish
parties, among them some who are described as "part of the
Orthodox rabbinate," to brazenly criticize in the general
media an ancient and holy custom.
There is no need to dwell here on the importance of the
mitzvah of bris milah, which is one of the
fundamentals of our religion. For generations, this mitzvah
has been kept devotedly by all Jews. Nonetheless, in the past
there have been those who have tried to undermine the
halochoh of metzitzah bepeh — the sucking of the
blood of the milah by mouth. The poskim always
firmly upheld the practice, forbidding any alteration to
Jewish custom.
Several parties have recently tried to force their opinion on
the public that the custom should be changed and the
metzitzah should be done using a tube rather than
directly by mouth. In the course of their campaign they
publicized their scandalous views in the general press.
They have irresponsibly pointed the finger of blame at the
customary milah procedure without backing their
charges up with strong evidence and without having conducted
any serious investigation.
In the context of the campaign against this aspect of
milah, an article appeared in one of the recent issues
of an American medical journal (PEDIATRICS Vol. 114
No. 2 August 2004, pp. e259-e263), arguing (without much
evidence) that the reason that babies in a few isolated cases
contracted a viral infection (Herpes) was their
mohalim doing metzitzah bepeh.
It was argued in the medical journal that the only reason
that the poskim continue to support this minhag
is that "some orthodox rabbis have felt threatened by
criticism of the old religious customs and strongly resist
any change in the traditional custom of oral metzitzah."
They revealed their preconceived notions when they
asserted, "We suspect, therefore, that this entity is
underreported for cultural reasons and that the studies
described here are only the "tip of the iceberg" of the true
incidence of the disease."
Without submitting any proof whatsoever they intimate that
there is a very high rate of infantile infection with this
infectious disease and that this is attributable to the "old
religious customs" of observant Jews who are unwilling to
"replac[e] ancient customs by modern wound care"
Naturally, no epidemiological studies or proofs have been
produced to support any of these spurious claims.
They say that the mohalim that they studied tested
positive for the virus in their blood (though not in their
mouth). They presented no evidence in general that boys who
are circumcised contract the disease more often than the
admitted regular incidence of 1-6 per 20,000 live births in
the general population.
The writers warn of "serious risk" to the health of
circumcised infants and conclude that "the cultural process
of replacing ancient practices with the modern treatment of
wounds has to be encouraged and supported through greater
awareness of medical complications that can endanger
life."
Though they present circumstantial evidence that rules out
the mother as the source of infection in most of the cases,
and write that the mohalim in question had it in their
blood (though not necessarily in their saliva), they could
not control or investigate the circumstances fully enough to
state with any confidence that there was no other source of
infection.
It may be enough evidence to discard something that is no
more than an "old religious custom," but it is far from the
level of evidence that one should require to upset a valued,
entrenched religious practice.
The fact is that they only have a few cases of infection out
of the many hundreds of thousands who have undergone
milah over the years, many of them using metzitzah
bepeh. If mohalim are so "dangerous," why are
there so few cases, a lower rate in fact than what would be
statistically expected?
The study's attempt at scientific analysis is so riddled with
faults that several professionals called it "junk science"
though others defended it.
Spokesmen for halochoh point out that "the fact is, according
to the expectations expressed in the article, in a place like
Kiryas Joel, for example, where many babies are circumcised
each month and most use metzitzah bepeh, there should
have been many cases of children being infected." This is not
the case.
This is pseudo-science, used by those with an agenda that
includes forcing their views on others and interfering with
their right to practice their ancestral faith.
Since the article was published and the issue found its way
into the general headlines, this irresponsible behavior, to
say the least, has already caused a tremendous chilul
Hashem by its false portrayal of Jewish law and tradition
in gentile eyes. For example:
"San Diego. Feb. 9, 2005. The recent death of a young boy in
New York City has led several Jewish groups to call for
putting an end to the tradition of circumcision. . . ."
In the wake of the controversy, American Torah leaders issued
a clear statement of halochoh ruling that the practice of
metzitzah bepeh should not be changed, to which the
opinion of HaRav Moshe Feinstein zt'l that no changes
should be made and that the merit of the milah is
protection from any danger, as conveyed by his son
ylct'a, was appended.
The American Torah world sought HaRav Eliashiv's opinion on
the matter. After thoroughly examining the topic, HaRav
Eliashiv gave his opinion that no change should be made but
where there is genuine concern that the mohel may be
sick with any kind of disease, the metzitzah should be
done by someone else. But under no circumstances should
halochoh be altered.
His letter states, "After clarifying the matter with expert
physicians in the Holy Land and abroad [and hearing] that
there is no medical concern that metzitzah bepeh as it
has customarily been practiced for generations will chas
vesholom cause any harm to the tender child undergoing
circumcision and [since] boruch Hashem tens of
thousands of our Jewish brethren fulfill this mitzvah
joyfully without there being any breach or outcry, it is
clear that all the talking about preventing metzitzah
bepeh is empty words. Choliloh that there be the
slightest change in the way metzitzah bepeh is
done.
"Nonetheless, when the mohel has a wound in his mouth,
the metzitzah bepeh should be done by someone
else."
Communal figures expressed their hope that all those with a
hand in stirring up this artificial storm will desist and put
a swift end to the terrible chilul Hashem that has
taken place, especially in view of the fact that there is a
danger that this could lead to gentile authorities placing
obstacles in the way of observant Jews continued practice of
the traditions of their forbears.
