Jump to content

Talk:Brit milah/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2

Anesthetic

This claim is not true: 

    Most prominent acharonim rule that the mitzvah of brit milah lies in the pain it causes, and anesthetic, sedation, or ointment should generally not be used.[14]

It is the opposite of what I have been taught by several mohelim. Pain is to be avoided, period, especially for babies. For adult converts, there are halachic issues where it is preferable, but not required, to stay awake during the procedure, but pain is not a required element. I also cannot verify the above claim by any other means, including books on the subject in my own personal library and online research. But perhaps the most troubling aspect is that the citation is false. The name of the publisher is misspelled. The book is rather obscure, but I did finally find the author's website. The online table of contents for the book shows that the title of the cited chapter is false. It is not in that book. 

    Eliezer Waldenberg, Yechiel Yaakov Weinberg, Shmuel Wosner, Moshe Feinstein and others agree that the child should not be sedated, although pain relieving ointment may be used under certain conditions; Shmuel Wosner particularly asserts that the act ought to be painful, as per Psalms 44:23.[14]

The above line is also of questionable veracity. Again, the citation is to the same non-existent work. The text above implies that pain reduction is not acceptable for brit milah. See this link for refutation, especially as concerns Rav Weinberg's attitude. The above quote doesn't fairly represent Moshe Feinstein's position either.

I don't edit very much on Wikipedia, so I'm looking for advice. Can I simply delete these lines and the citation? The remaining text will need some cleanup, which I will do.

Radicaldad (talk) 11:42, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Talmud

Rabbi Moses Sofer (1762–1839) observed that the Talmud states that the rationale for this part of the ritual was hygienic

Does anyone know if Sofer referred to specific numbered passages in the Talmud we could mention? I would like to read them. Ranze (talk) 05:37, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

Inappropriate use of phrase "current medical knowledge"

In the section "Ritual Components", subsection "Metzitzah", there is a line which states "this step is in order to draw some blood from deep inside the wound to prevent danger to the baby,[33] and current medical knowledge confirms the benefits of the practice.[34] (emphasis mine)

The reference provided is not a medical reference, nor is any medical source properly referenced in the link provided. I think an adequate source should be able to either: 1) demonstrate that in circumcisions done in a hospital or medical setting, a similar "suction" type maneuver is also employed because it is recognized that this is helpful, or 2) provide empirical evidence that, even though a medical doctor would not employ any kind of suction following a circumcision performed in such a setting, there is somehow a benefit in the setting of the Brit milah.

If neither of these things can be shown to be true, then the phrase "current medical knowledge confirms the benefit of the practice" should be removed.

Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:569:FAEC:3A00:5042:9317:1885:4FAE (talk) 09:23, 26 April 2016 (UTC)


I removed the phrase. Until peer-reviewed medical journals have found any benefits, this is indeed merely an unsupported claim (the author of the cited text being a doctor does not help much). Considering the source, an orthodox Jewish journal, I also see a violation of neutrality in particular, see Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. Flowi (talk) 14:33, 4 August 2016 (UTC)


"Some Jewish families practice brit shalom instead." <- This should not be mentioned in the intro paragraph because those families are a very tiny minority. ImTheIP (talk) 22:44, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Brit milah. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:46, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Brit milah. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:52, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Brit milah. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:46, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Brit milah. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:52, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Brit milah. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:02, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

metzitzah b’peh

Is metzitzah b'peh considered as pedophilia? Why or why not? Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A01:E35:8A8D:FE80:4901:6A90:99A0:761C (talk) 16:50, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

I'm sure some critics out there have alleged that, but pedophilia is a diagnosis given to people, not actions. Ranze (talk) 05:38, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

So, you're saying the sucking of a child's penis is okay when classed as religion.

It's not just pedophillia but also practicing surgery without a medical license. I guess you commit any crime you want in the name of god — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.120.121.244 (talk) 22:05, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

It's a crime whether it's done by a doctor or not, whether there's any "sucking" or not. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 45.72.217.158 (talk) 07:23, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Debate over oral suction, 19th century

The article doesn't clarify the extent of the debate in the 19th century. Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch of Frankfurt (1808-1888), Rabbi Azriel Hildesheimer of Berlin (1820-1899) and Rabbi Yitzchak Elchanan Spektor of Kovno (1817–1896) had already ratified the use of glass tubes in the 1880's at the behest of Rabbi Dr Michael Cahn of Fulda (1849-1920). [1]

References

  1. ^ "Hadashot Be'Yisro'el". HaZvi: 5. 7 December 1888.

Herpes

Can we have a section about the transmission of herpes due to the mohel suckking on the babies penis?

Paragraph

For some reason someone stuck in a paragraph about some people signing an affidavit. I don't see how this was significant nor do I see any comment about how this was handled, if it was actually filed. There are also no actual sources (pictures of affidavits are not sources). Enigmamsg 01:28, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

Someone named Bloger is now edit warring to keep in the unsourced paragraph. Enigmamsg 20:34, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
He has been edit-warring for months over it and refuses to discuss it on the talk page. Enigmamsg 05:11, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

Horrible grammar

Bloger continues to restore poorly written junk to the article, refuses to discuss it, and reported me to AN/I. Wow. Enigmamsg 16:44, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

New Testament?!

Why is there a section close to the top about the New Testament? Brit milah is a Jewish practice. There is no need for Christians to insert their takes on the subject in an article about Jewish practice. I understand that it is true that Christians have historically adopted or interpreted these customs, but the tone of the section implies that the practice is just as important and relevant to Christians as it is to Jews. I think it is out of place where it is. Similarities with Islam aren't mentioned until section 8; doesn't it make more sense to place the Relevance to Christians section alongside it? Edit: I'm supposed to sign, apparently? Hopefully I did it right this time. 66.44.8.229 (talk) 02:43, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

בְּרִית מִילָה is pronounced as Berit mila rather than brit mila.

The word בְּרִית in בְּרִית מִילָה is should be pronounced as bErit rather than brit, since the letter בְּ is with "shva na" (Hebrew vowel like e) rather than "shva nakh" which is not pronounced. It's a common mistake that now also documented on Wiki and misleads people that doesn't know well Hebrew. 93.126.116.89 (talk) 18:50, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

The shva might be a shva na But it is pronounced weakly or not at all due to yiddish influence. Carenymre (talk) 15:56, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Plus, this is enwiki, not hewiki. Native English speakers mispronounce all sorts of words brought into the English vernacular (e.g. marinara, entrée, etc; mispronounce in italics, bc once they are indeed brought into the vocabulary, they have their own English pronounciation—not to mention sometimes different meaning altogether!—as in the aforementioned examples). — Guarapiranga ☎ 02:20, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

covenant of circumcision

Is this actually the most technically accurate translation of what the Hebrew term means?

"circumcision" means "cut around", compare for example to "incision" which does not, since it lacks the prefix "circum"

Does the term milah have anything in it specifying "around" ?

If it doesn't then wouldn't "covenant of incision" or "covenant of cut" be more accurate?

Actually wondering what the earliest usage was of this term. Doing a google books search I've been able to find results back to the 1510s or so before the Old English makes it unintelligible. WakandaQT (talk) 03:20, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

I reckon the best bet for finding an answer to this question is in Glick (2005).[1]

References

  1. ^ Glick, Leonard (2005). Marked in Your Flesh: Circumcision from Ancient Judea to Modern America. United States: Oxford University Press. pp. 1–3, 15–35. ISBN 978-0195176742.
— Guarapiranga ☎ 02:25, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
For your initial question, if you go to Google and translate "covenant circumcision", the result is Brit Milah written in Hebrew. If you are not familiar with reading Hebrew, you can click on a link to hear it pronounced. As an ancient (and rather concise) language, Hebrew phrases often omit prepositions like "of". So strictly speaking, Brit Milah translates to Covenant Circumcision, but most translators would insert the "of". So, to answer your initial question: Yes. Brit Milah means Covenant of Circumcision.
Not having a copy of Glick available, I cannot speak to your final sentence. Howardlhoffman (talk) 19:37, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

Antisemitism?

I'm on the phone and also am inexperienced in Wikipedia editing. However the first part of the article seems to be biased against orthodox Judaism. Carenymre (talk) 15:59, 31 March 2021 (UTC).

Dear all,
Agreed, this page has extreme bias or in wikipedia jargon NPOV issues. For interested editors, here is a source which may be beneficial in correcting this https://www.academia.edu/21731836/Circumspection_an_Inquiry_into_Brit_Milah
Blessings,
Yaakov W. Yaakov Wa. (talk) 22:51, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
certainly the first paragraph is bizarre. If the article is about a religious rite, then what does "controlling male sexuality" have to do with it? That has nothing to do with this Jewish religious rite. If such an idea needs to be in the article, it would be in a separate section on "conspiracy theories" or "non-Jewish interpretations". Actually, most of the lede should be elsewhere. and some of it seems like original research (epispasm, eg). 142.163.194.161 (talk) 14:20, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

Compared to other articles and the main circumcision article on Wikipedia, this page does seem to have NPOV issues with language and focus, selective quotations and emphasis, etc... It seems to have gotten worse with edits over the past year and a half or so. 216.161.81.210 (talk) 20:12, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

Agree that this article is biased, but not just against orthodox Judaism. That is why I am planning to start doing significant edits on this article. I will add a new section to this Talk page in advance of each edit that I do. I welcome others interested in seeing this article end up with a WP:NPOV to join me. I also invite anyone questioning my edits to respond in this Talk Page. As for the Section heading "Antisemitism?", I would not ascribe the motive of whoever has made a mess of this article (at least as it exists at the time of my comment here) as Antisemitism. So thank you to Carenymre for at least just posing this as a question. In Wikipedia editing, we are supposed to [WP:Assume Good Faith]]. Anyone familiar with the role that circumcision has played in Jewish history, knows that the battle over European attitudes vs. Middle Eastern (not just Jewish) attitudes on the subject has been going on for at least 2500 years. If you are not an experienced Wikipedia editor and want to become one, then I strongly recommend Wikipedia: The Missing Manual, by John Broughton. Howardlhoffman (talk) 19:51, 6 August 2022 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Brit_milah/Archive_2&oldid=1265547780"