Hassidic circumcision ritual

[Tag-MehirTzedek]

  Don't know what soap and water means, but your sceename should be changed to  angryChineseFaggit  because Rav Kahane would not tolerate such sh^t from someone calling themselves a "Kahanist".

[muman613]

  Don't know what soap and water means, but your sceename should be changed to  angryChineseFaggit  because Rav Kahane would not tolerate such sh^t from someone calling themselves a "Kahanist".

I think ack is just trying to make fun. He doesn't realize how important the ritual of circumcision is to religious Jews.

I don't think calling him names is appropriate, but he should not make light of this practice.

I do know that at the brits I've attended the Mohel uses disinfectant to ensure his equipment is sterile.

[Dr. Dan]

Great article and I even read the whole thing!!!

Here is a discussion of some of the issues involved:


http://www.torahtalk.net/Archives/576527.htm

TAZRIA (Leviticus, 12:1‑13:59)
"Blood Libel 2005"

I really didn’t want to write this article.
 
Often, the best way to react to negative PR is to ignore it.  When you respond to ugly accusations, you sometimes exacerbate the problem by giving a forum to a topic that does not deserve one.  I hoped that the story would die down and go away.  Therefore, I chose to remain silent.
 
Ironically, this terrible tragedy has been great for business.  I have received phone calls and emails from concerned parents in search for a Mohel who wouldn’t “endanger” their child.  After a satisfactory conversation, they have been relieved of worry, and happy to utilize my services.
 
Then, someone went too far.
 
I was examiming a baby prior to his Bris.  The father asked me about my methodology.  When I responded to his questions, he responded, “Good.  That’s terrible, what that rabbi did to that baby!”
 
"... what that rabbi did to that baby."  The story is not going away.  The lies are continuing to be told, and believed.  Now, at least within our forum of friends, I feel the need to speak out.  You, who are kind enough to read what I have to say on Torah topics, deserve to know the truth.
 
The truth is that a good man, and a holy practice, are being maligned in the press.  And, as we know all too well, few stories sell as well as those that trash Torah Judaism.  (See “Sorry PETA, Pig’s Feet aren’t Kosher!”)
 
I refer, of course, to the Metzitzah controversy.
 
At issue is the question of whether a Mohel has infected twin babies, one of whom died, and other children, with Herpes.  As a result, there is talk of governmental agencies regulating the practice of religious circumcision.  As an additional result, the country is abuzz with stories about this practice, and ridiculing Judaism with accusations of the worst kinds of perversion.
 
 
This week’s Torah Portion tells us that an eight-day-old boy needs to be circumcised.  That is all it says.  There are no instructions in the Written Torah as to how to do a Bris.  That is explained in the Talmud.
 
The Talmud requires that after a child is circumcised the blood should be drawn away from the wound by suction.  I have always considered this to be similar to allowing the area of a tooth extraction to bleed in order to carry possible pathogens away from the wound site, thus reducing the risk of infection.  Especially in view of the fact that a knife that LOOKS clean is not necessarily sterile, the requirement of Metzitzah (suction) is yet another indication of the wisdom of the Sages of Israel.
 
It is clear and obvious that the Talmud’s intent in insisting upon Metzitzah is a safety issue.  In fact, the Talmud states that a Mohel who does not perform Metzitzah is endangering children and needs to be dismissed from his position.
 
The most convenient method of applying this suction is orally.  (Envision the old cowboy, out on the range, sucking the poison out of a snake bite.)  Until a few hundred years ago, this is how every Mohel suctioned the blood away from the wound.
 
To be sure, the image of a rabbi sucking blood away from a circumcision does not, to say the least, sit well with the average modern American.  One may wonder whether a procedure, designed ostensibly to prevent disease, may do just the opposite.  In addition, the connotations of such act certainly seem to fly in the face of a religion that insists upon the avoidance of any appearance of impropriety.  Indeed, one newspaper article, written (of course) by a Jewish reporter, wonders how  “… in a time of concern about pedophilia and child abuse, an adult can be permitted to…” (I won’t dignify the remainder of the question with a direct quote)
 
 
Many years ago, opponents of religious circumcision used their objections to Metzitzah as an excuse to ban circumcision entirely.  Much of this opposition to Bris emanated from members of the Jewish community.  They claimed that circumcision was an antiquated and dangerous practice that modern Jewry should reject.
 
As a result of this controversy, the Metzitzah tube was introduced.  The Mohel would place a sterile glass tube over the site of the circumcision, and apply suction to the other end of the tube.  This method, which prevents a mixture of bodily fluids, was considered safer for the baby as well as the Mohel.
 
Many Torah sages embraced this concept as a way of maintaining the tradition of Metzitzah without compromising standards of sterile surgical procedure.  Others, who saw this as a departure from traditional practices, saw the Metzitzah tube as a threat to Torah observance.
 
The debate continues.  Many Torah authorities, including those under whom I have studied, see the Metzitzah tube as being in full compliance with the Talmud’s requirement for suctioning blood away from the wound.  Others, especially, but not strictly limited to, those within the Chassidic community, insist upon Metzitzah b’feh -- oral suction.
 
A twenty-first century mind such as yours or mine may be tempted to question such a position.  After all, with everything we know today about sterility, how can such a procedure be tolerated?
 
An article recently appeared in a prominent medical magazine calling for the cessation of Metzitzah b’feh.  The magazine claimed that a number of babies who had developed Herpes had been linked to their Mohels.  Many have cited this article as proof that Metzitzah must be done with a sterile tube.  Many others have questioned the findings of this article.
 
I am not going to comment on the article either way.  I would like to point out a different observation.
 
A pediatrician who treats many of the members of a particular Chassidic community pointed out that that particular community produces “a new kindergarten class every month.”  The Chassidic community, with its high birthrate, G-d bless them, does not, by and large, accept the use of a Metzitzah tube.
 
With the thousands upon thousands of babies being born in that community, one would expect to see a high incidence of Metzitzah b’feh-related disease.  They are not seeing it!  Their doctors (, almost all of whom are not Chassidic, or even particularly religious,) are not reporting it!
 
 
It has been widely reported that a Mohel in my community has been infecting children with Herpes.  Let me state for the record that this man, who has dedicated his career to helping people, is an expert Mohel.  He has traveled all over the world, especially to the former Soviet Union, to perform the Brisses for Jews who might otherwise not have had access to a Mohel.  I have occasionally consulted him for advice on complicated cases.
 
The story, reported everywhere from the New York Times to Al Jazeera, is that the rabbi circumcised twin boys, both of whom developed Herpes, one of whom died.  The Mohel has been under investigation.  Meanwhile, the New York City Health Department ruled that he could not do Metzitzah b’feh, pending the conclusion of the investigation.
 
What has been widely reported within the Jewish community, but not picked up in the press, is that the Mohel has fully cooperated with the investigation.  He has reportedly tested negatively in repeated blood and DNA tests.  It has also been reported that one of the babies had a suspicious rash BEFORE the Bris.
 
Rumors abound.  So much is being claimed about the details of this case.  Eventually it will all come out.  I believe that the Mohel will be exonerated.  But don’t expect the New York Times to report on that.  (“All the news that fits, we print!”)  Where will a decent and righteous man go to regain his reputation?
 
 
As you can see, I am on both sides of this issue.
 
I do not perform Metzitzah b’feh.  I don’t need to.  My teachers feel that it is not necessary.  When parents have requested Metzitzah b’feh, I have respectfully suggested that I will do the Bris and the father can do the Metzitzah.  When parents have insisted upon Metzitzah b’feh, performed BY THE MOHEL, I have respectfully recommended that they find another Mohel.
 
That having been said, I must emphasize that many great authorities whom I greatly respect have advocated continuing to do Metzitzah as it was done in the time of the Talmud.  Is it safe?  A lot of people who are a lot smarter than I maintain that it is.  (Many articles and books have been written on the topic of Metzitzah b’feh, attempting to demonstrate that it is actually SAFER than Metzitzah with a sterile tube.  I don’t know.  If you are interested in more information, you may click here and draw your own conclusion.)
 
 
I am very concerned about this controversy.  While, as I indicated above, it really doesn’t directly affect me and my practice as a Mohel, nobody (at least, nobody whom I respect) wants government intervention in religious practice.  But that is where we are headed.  That’s what PETA wants to do to Kosher slaughter, and that’s what the anti-circumcision crowd wants to do to Bris Milah.  They don’t want to regulate Kosher slaughter and ritual circumcision; they want to END them.  And, all too often, our biggest opponents tend to be Jews.
 
The word Bris means covenant.  It is a contract between G-d and Israel.  We must do His will, and He will watch over us.  May G-d watch over that poor grief-stricken family who lost their baby.  May He watch over an honorable Mohel and bless him with continued success.  May He protect us from all harm and disease.  May He protect us from government meddling into our religious affairs.
 
And may he protect us from all enemies; be they from outside the Jewish community or from within.

[Dr. Dan]

  Don't know what soap and water means, but your sceename should be changed to  angryChineseFaggit  because Rav Kahane would not tolerate such sh^t from someone calling themselves a "Kahanist".

Your response is not appropriate.  Look at Muman's response..that's how we should speak to one another.

[Tag-MehirTzedek]

Your response is not appropriate.  Look at Muman's response..that's how we should speak to one another.

 Your condemning my response yet not addressing the previous insult he jabbed?

[Dr. Dan]

 Your condemning my response yet not addressing the previous insult he jabbed?

Because you mistook what ACK was saying. Read what muman wrote in response to him compared to what you wrote.

Some individuals should be responded to angrily and others at a different tone.

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

I have no problem with Muman providing additional information on the subject.  It makes his posts worth reading in many cases.  However, I agree with Kahane that this is a terrible practice.  I have vocally opposed any attempts to outlaw circumcision but this is a case of tradition trumping common sense which I cannot favor.

You may be missing my point which I made to muman.  Circumcision cam be done in accordance with halacha, without metzizah bpeh.   This has absolutely nothing to do w outlawing circumcision like the neo nazis desire to do.

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

The Fox News article has some misinformation as no baby has contracted HIV yet from MBP. THe DOHMA has acknowledged that fact so expect a correction on that aspect of the story in the next few days.

 - The baby did not get it from the mohel, his older brother had it. Their are different ways that it can and is transmitted including through the mother.
- This came up before, bloomfag wants to and wanted to bann it. This is a halahic discussion and should be solely within the Orthodox Jewish community to decide what they do and want to do and how this should be done. Perverted reshaim should have no say on this.
 
 KWRBT although you do not hold of this, recognize that others do. And as such since their are things you do that others do not and you want and expect respect for your Halahic practices soo should the courtesy be extended unto others as well.

Sorry but no matter how many people "hold of" this, it is criminal malevolence to put a child at risk.  You are correct that the risk in terms of numbers (statistics, percentages) is low as it happens very rarely, but it still happens and can happen.  Why take that risk?  Its putting a child at risk for no reason when the halacha provides plenty of leeway and leniency on this issue to make the risk zero by doing it differently.  So someone sticking to it and putting their child at risk is nothing but a chossid shoteh IMO, being strict because they think its spiritual or something.

[muman613]

Sorry but no matter how many people "hold of" this, it is criminal malevolence to put a child at risk.  You are correct that the risk in terms of numbers (statistics, percentages) is low as it happens very rarely, but it still happens and can happen.  Why take that risk?  Its putting a child at risk for no reason when the halacha provides plenty of leeway and leniency on this issue to make the risk zero by doing it differently.  So someone sticking to it and putting their child at risk is nothing but a chossid shoteh IMO, being strict because they think its spiritual or something.

It is not just Chassidic ritual. It has been performed by all Jews until recently (last 100 years)...

I have posted good information on the whys and wherefores concerning this. You seem to want to jump on the bandwagon of the libelers of circumcision. You do realize that a small number of boys have been 'disfigured' by circumcision? Look at the anti-circumcision propaganda... Every boy who goes through with ritual circumcision is at risk...

Metzitzah must be performed one way or another... I would say that the tube method may appear safer but I don't know if there are any statistics to prove this.

[Tag-MehirTzedek]

Sorry but no matter how many people "hold of" this, it is criminal malevolence to put a child at risk.  You are correct that the risk in terms of numbers (statistics, percentages) is low as it happens very rarely, but it still happens and can happen.  Why take that risk?  Its putting a child at risk for no reason when the halacha provides plenty of leeway and leniency on this issue to make the risk zero by doing it differently.  So someone sticking to it and putting their child at risk is nothing but a chossid shoteh IMO, being strict because they think its spiritual or something.

 Perhaps not doing this is more riskier then doing it because the blood can still stay in even with the tube. Also who said that it is putting the child at risk? You are making too many assumptions. These are issues that are addressed with the halahic authorities and the conclusions each group makes should be respected.
 You calling it "criminal" is wayy over the top and on top of that having secular or non-Jewish government intervene is even more criminal because once you give them leeway they will bann circumcision altogether, and these are discussions in Halacha and no outside gov. and am haartzim should have a say in this especially those who make fun of and project their own nasty perverted ideas and minds unto this subject.

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

It is not just Chassidic ritual. It has been performed by all Jews until recently (last 100 years)...

I have posted good information on the whys and wherefores concerning this. You seem to want to jump on the bandwagon of the libelers of circumcision. You do realize that a small number of boys have been 'disfigured' by circumcision? Look at the anti-circumcision propaganda... Every boy who goes through with ritual circumcision is at risk...

Metzitzah must be performed one way or another... I would say that the tube method may appear safer but I don't know if there are any statistics to prove this.

Muman, Chassid Shoteh is a Talmudic term.  It has nothing to do with the Chassidic movement of the 1700's or today and has nothing to do with whether one is a "Chassidic Jew" or Litvak Jew or any type of Jew.  The word "chassid" doesn't belong to chassidic Jews, it's a real hebrew term.

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

Perhaps not doing this is more riskier then doing it because the blood can still stay in even with the tube.

What?

First off, you are citing Talmudic health practices, but the Tosfos and many authorities already say that we don't go in our day by the medical recommendations of the Talmud.   All the more so today, hundreds of years after those rishonim that said that.   So the whole idea about blood suctioning protecting the baby is not necessarily correct.   But even if it was...

There should not be any difficulty suctioning through a tube.  What is the difference?   If the guy does a thorough job, then he does a thorough job.     "The tube isn't good enough" is said by people who want to insist on the ages old practice so "disbelieve" any type of innovation.     But many poskim have said the glass tube is good, and tons of people utilize this.

Also who said that it is putting the child at risk? You are making too many assumptions. 

Well it doesn't take a medical genius or a scientific wizard to understand that the mouth is a mucous membrane, the penis itself has a mucous membrane, so both of these enable the passing of germs from one to another, and especially an OPEN WOUND is a serious risk of spreading germs.   So it's not really an assumption, it's more like scientific fact. 
There is a certain mohel I am aware of in Monsey who infected multiple babies and is banned from performing this procedure.    It has happened that babies contracted something.   In that case, I am not assuming anything, I'm assessing reality which says that although a tiny number of babies ever got anything, still - some did.   And that means the possible risk (discussed above) was confirmed as an actual risk.

These are issues that are addressed with the halahic authorities and the conclusions each group makes should be respected.
 You calling it "criminal" is wayy over the top

Was it "over the top" when chazal referred to as a "chassid shoteh" a man who would refuse saving a drowning woman because of shomer negiah concerns?      To me, this is a similar use of that category.   Someone who would endanger their child for the sake of some mysterious form of "piety" is a chassid shoteh in my view.   There are certain things which cannot be respected.  Endangering a child is one.     

and on top of that having secular or non-Jewish government intervene is even more criminal because once you give them leeway they will bann circumcision altogether, and these are discussions in Halacha and no outside gov.

Govt shouldn't have to get involved.  Jews should be smart enough to take precautions and do away with a practice that is unnecessary by Jewish law and could cause complications.
 

and am haartzim should have a say in this especially those who make fun of and project their own nasty perverted ideas and minds unto this subject.

Well, I don't know what this has to do with am haaratzim, unless you are referring to me as one.  I never said am haaratzim should decide the matter.   But if am haaratzim are on the correct side of this issue, maybe a broken clock is right twice a day.   

I might be an am haaretz, but I think the points I've made are valid.

[Tag-MehirTzedek]

KWRBT-
 Didn't refer to you as an amhaaretz. I was thinking of people like Mr. Weiner aka "Savage" who I am disgusted with after hearing his show. What an ignoramus and basher of the Torah and of Chazal.

[Secularbeliever]

I'm still of the opinion that there's no legitimate reason for a grown man to be putting his mouth on a baby's genitalia.

BINGO. I was starting to wonder why I was the only one thinking that.

[muman613]

My point which has not been addressed is that the entire circumcision is risky. Any medical procedure which involves cutting will always be 'risky'. Any procedure which involves blood is risky. Just going into a hospital is 'risky' due to exposure to germs.

What is the risk? What are the statistics in comparison with other risks we take every day. I do not look at risk too much because my entire life is facing risks. I risk my life every day driving to work. Statistics indicate I should have had more accidents than I have had, yet Baruch Hashem I have been safe (over 10 years of driving 150 miles a day [70 in each direction])... Baruch Hashem!

Certainly we should do what is necessary to reduce risks. But sometimes it seems to me that the Jew haters will never cease to use things like this to knock our traditions. The gentiles have attacked this practice for many hundred of years. It is important to make sure that we keep our traditions and the commandments to the best of our understanding.

If the poskim agree eventually that the tube is the best thing (in order to fulfill the halachic issues involved in the brit) then I agree with it. At this time I believe that there are questions, and we should learn what these questions are before we form our opinions.

[muman613]

BINGO. I was starting to wonder why I was the only one thinking that.

We have explained it over and over again, it is concerning sucking a drop of blood in order to increase the flow of blood in order to reduce infection.

That you suggest something sinister is a question you should address because if I suggest something you would be insulted.

http://www.askmoses.com/en/article/569,2173973/Why-does-a-mohel-suck-the-blood-after-circumcision.html

[angryChineseKahanist]

  Don't know what soap and water means, but your sceename should be changed to  angryChineseFaggit  because Rav Kahane would not tolerate such sh^t from someone calling themselves a "Kahanist".

After almost 13 years with JTF I turn and stab the Jews in the back!
Calm down. I still love you.
BTW you spelled faggot wrong.
And please stop using AOL.

[Rubystars]

We have explained it over and over again, it is concerning sucking a drop of blood in order to increase the flow of blood in order to reduce infection.

That you suggest something sinister is a question you should address because if I suggest something you would be insulted.

http://www.askmoses.com/en/article/569,2173973/Why-does-a-mohel-suck-the-blood-after-circumcision.html

There can be no explanation for that, that's sufficient to justify a grown man putting their mouth on a child's genitalia. I see the explanations and my response is that it's not good enough, and no explanation can be.

BINGO. I was starting to wonder why I was the only one thinking that.

You're definitely not the only one. Some people don't want to post about it because they don't want to risk offending some of the posters here though.

[muman613]

There can be no explanation for that, that's sufficient to justify a grown man putting their mouth on a child's genitalia. I see the explanations and my response is that it's not good enough, and no explanation can be.

You're definitely not the only one. Some people don't want to post about it because they don't want to risk offending some of the posters here though.

Obviously you are entitled to your opinion. But I doubt it will change a thing. Gentiles have said the same thing for many centuries and this ritual is still performed today.

[Super Mentalita]

A person that does something like this must be hanged immediately!

[angryChineseKahanist]

isn't there a more modern way to do this?

anesthesia for the baby's manhood. cut it off with modern surgical tools. Suck the blood with a robot "mouth".

what if the baby has HIV, then the rabbi would get it.

[Super Mentalita]

By the way, there is no religious excuse for paedophilia!

[Tag-MehirTzedek]

By the way, there is no religious excuse for paedophilia!

 Yes you are correct, but this isn't pedophilia. It is only filthy minds such as yours that think of it this way.

[Super Mentalita]

 Yes you are correct, but this isn't pedophilia. It is only filthy minds such as yours that think of it this way.

Is it? Suck the blood drip of a baby penis? Paedophilia, no other word for it.

[Super Mentalita]

 Yes you are correct, but this isn't pedophilia. It is only filthy minds such as yours that think of it this way.

I support the Jews in the international battle against Islam. I support Israel, but i DON'T support perversion like this!