"Circumcision is based on men’s domination of women. By this
procedure, the child is separated from his mother who does not have any
authority on him any longer. This harms the child, for at this stage he
needs his mother most and she cannot defend him, in spite of the fact
that they are attached to one another at this early age. The knife that
is pointed to the child is in fact pointed to the heart and soul of the
mother. Circumcision is actually an injury to the mother; it is
humiliating to her since it implies that ‘Your authority over males is
limited; moreover, this child belongs to the male community.’ In this
manner, the relationship between man and woman is disturbed and
similarly the relationship between mother and child. The child’s
separation from the mother is a preparation for his separation from her
when he is recruited by the army." (Aldeeb Abu-Sahlieh, 2000) That is why some scholars of Judaism doubt the historical origin of the
events that took place in the Old Testament. Abu-Sahlieh said that
circumcision goes back further than the Old Testament because
historical
documents were found that proved that circumcision was a procedure
carried out in Ancient Syria in the 28th century B.C. and in Ancient
Egypt in the 23rd century B.C. In the latter, it was not carried out on
all Egyptians but only on the priests. This is proved by the Roman
Emperor Hadrian, who forbid this procedure on everyone in the 2nd
century A.D,, but he exempted the Egyptian priests.
The Jews used circumcision politically over the years. It was a
procedure that was carried out on a relative basis and not done on
everyone. Historians state that
this procedure was not obligatory to Jews except after their return from exile in the 6th century B.C.
A group of Jews made an agreement with surrounding nations in the 2nd
century B.C. They stopped observing circumcision, and hid the signs of
the procedure by pulling down the skin of the penis to cover its head.
They could do so because in ancient times circumcision did not include a
complete amputation of the prepuce, as is the case now. It was the
outer layer that was cut only. The anti-circumcision trend appeared
again in the 2nd century A.D. The rabbis, though, created a new way of
circumcision by amputating the two layers of the prepuce as a counter
reaction to the mentioned trend. Moreover,
in 1842, a group of German
Jews questioned the obligatory imposition of circumcision; but they
retreated under pressure of conservative Jewish clergy.
 |
| Circumcision Was in Egypt Before Hebrews |
Also, as shown on left, the procedure that was practiced
in ancient times is nowhere near as intrusive as it is today, i.e. the
very rim of the prepuce being cut, versus the full prepuce being removed
in today's procedures. The ancient Jews understood the procedure to be
symbolic, not an actual surgical procedure, ergo they did something
symbolic and not a fully invasive surgical removal which could lead to
tremendous complications, to the point of losing one's life or being
horribly disfigured. Furthermore, there are countless passages in the
same Old Testament, predating the story of the Abraham circumcision that
commands all Jews to never harm the body, in fact it is in no less than
3 of the 10 commandments .
Milah: Symbolic Circumcision of Covenant
The original Biblical circumcision of Abraham's time was a relatively
minor ritual circumcision procedure in which only the redundant end of
the foreskin extending beyond the tip of the glans was removed. This was
called "Milah". It is from this term that the Jewish Religious Covenant
circumcision ritual Bris Milah or Brith Milah got its name. This type circumcision continued throughout the ages and during the time
of Christ. The circumcision of Christ would have been this type
circumcision as referred to in the bible. Indeed, biblical reference to
circumcision is strictly this form of circumcision. It continued into
the New Testament. It has been argued that Michelangelo's David should
show David as Circumcised. Interestingly, Michelangelo presented David
precisely as he should have appeared following an infant "Milah"
circumcision. His glans is essentially covered with only the tip of the
glans showing.
Changes to the Ritual Circumcision Procedure:
No other feature was added to the religious ritual until about 140 AD
when a second step to the ritual circumcision procedure was introduced.
Periah: The laying bare of the glans
After performing "milah", the cutting back of the end of the infant's foreskin, a second step,
periah was
then performed. Periah consists of tearing and stripping back the
remaining inner mucosal lining of the foreskin from the glans and then,
by use of a sharp finger nail or implement, removing all of the inner
mucosal tissue, including the excising and removal of the frenulum from
the underside of the glans. The objective was to insure that no part of
the remaining penile skin would rest against the glans corona. If any
shreds of the mucosal foreskin tissue remained, or rejoined to the
underside of the glans, the child was to be re-circumcised.
By introducing the painful and debilitating "Periah" they would
obliterate the foreskin completely such that proper circumcised Jew
could not disguise "the seal of the covenant". From this point in Jewish
history, the male's glans is directly affected by the circumcision
procedure, and the denuded glans and traumatized infant will heal with
considerable nerve damage and loss of sensitivity. Again, it is
important to note that this is not the Covenant circumcision of Abraham
defined in the Bible. Metzitzeh: (Mezzizza/Mizizah) The sucking of blood from the wound.
During the Talmudic period (500-625 A.D.), a third step was added to the
Orthodox circumcision ritual. It was not universally adopted by all
Jewish groups, but became a practice of the more Orthodox groups. This
third step was called "Metzitzah". During "Metzitzah", the mohel takes
the now badly bleeding penis into his mouth and sucks the blood from the
wounded pant. This was most probably adopted to collapse the major
blood vessels to stem bleeding and to extract any induced bacteria from
the wound and blood system. In effect, it often introduced infection,
such as tuberculosis and venereal diseases, with very serious and tragic
consequence, as reported throughout history. More modern day mohels use
a glass tube placed over the infant's penis for suction of the blood
when performing metzitzah. In many Jewish ritual circumcisions this step
of Metzitzah has been eliminated.
Routine Infant Circumcision was introduced during the late 1800's and
throughout the 1900's on the pretext that it offered health and hygiene
benefits, would stop the habit of masturbation, and proffered an endless
list of presumed cures for a variety of ailments and diseases. As
mother's opted to use physicians to give birth in hospitals or clinics,
rather than using a midwife for home birth, the practice of routine
circumcision of male infants blossomed and became nearly universal.
