Rambam - 3 Chapters a Day

Although a father is commanded to circumcise his son, if he is not present or cannot perform the mitzvah, it may be performed by another person.

In his Kessef Mishneh, Rav Yosef Caro explains that it refers to a person who was not circumcised because his brothers died because of circumcision. A Jew who intentionally fails to circumcise himself, however, should not be allowed to circumcise others. Rav Yosef Caro also quotes this ruling in the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De’ah 264:1). Note also the Rama (loc. cit), who states that an apostate should not be allowed to circumcise others.

Although a slave is not a full-fledged member of the Jewish community, he is obligated to perform certain mitzvot and is himself circumcised.

Avodah Zarah 27a allows a woman to perform a circumcision, because “a woman is considered as if she is circumcised.” The matter is, however, one of debate, and other Sages do not allow a woman to perform a circumcision. Tosafot follow this view and their opinion is quoted by the Rama (loc. cit).

This is allowed because a minor will ultimately be obligated to perform all the mitzvot and is circumcised himself.

I.e., if possible, an adult male should be charged with the fulfillment of this mitzvah.

The Chatam Sofer (Yoreh De’ah, Responsum 132) explains that when a gentile performs a circumcision, it is as if the mitzvah has not been performed at all.

This is the accepted practice today. Some authorities maintain that even the Rambam requires such a step.

See Exodus 4:25, which relates that Tziporah (Moses’ wife) performed a circumcision with such a utensil.

Chulin 16b explains that we are afraid that a splinter from the reed may damage the penis.

The Targum Yonatan interprets Joshua 5:2 as an indication that iron was used for circumcision even at that early age. The Prishah (Yoreh De’ah 284:7) relates that this custom was instituted after Goliath’s iron helmet split open before David’s stone. God promised iron that, in recognition of its act on behalf of the Jews, they would use it for a positive purpose in future generations. The Mishnah (Shabbat 19:1) refers to the use of iron utensils for circumcision as an accepted custom.

See the Jerusalem Talmud, Shabbat 19:6.

I.e., all the tissue of the foreskin until its ridge must be removed.

The pri’ah should be carried out after the circumcision itself. Today, there are some mohalim who insert a utensil and lift up the membrane before the circumcision, and then cut off the foreskin and the membrane together. Many contemporary authorities have criticized this approach.

The Yalkut Shimoni, Vol. II, note 723, states that nails were created for this purpose.

Preferably, no portion of the foreskin or the membrane should remain. See Chatam Sofer (Yoreh De’ah, Responsum 248).

Traditionally, the mohel sucks out the blood with his mouth. Nevertheless, in previous generations, the Rabbis did grant license to use a pipette because of the possibility that germs in the mohel’s mouth might infect the child. Today, there are authorities who suggest the use of a pipette because of the danger that the mohel could contract AIDS.

The Tiferet Yisrael (Shabbat 19:2) relates that internal bleeding caused by the circumcision could cause the penis to swell, and applying suction to remove the blood averts that danger. The Tiferet Yisrael also writes that a danger exists that applying too strong a suction will rupture the blood vessels and cause excessive bleeding. Therefore, he recommends that one should apply gentle suction.

Because of the danger to which he exposes the children.

To stop the bleeding and assist the healing of the wound.

Rashi, Shabbat 137b, states that surely if the foreskin is left on the greater part of the circumference of the penis’ crown, it is unacceptable. When quoting this law, the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De’ah 264:5) states that if the greater part of the height of the crown is left covered in any one place, the circumcision is not acceptable. Thus, even a thin strand of skin that covers either the greater part of the height or the greater part of the circumference of the crown can disqualify the circumcision.

A second circumcision is required in such an instance, and a blessing is recited when performing it.

See the following halachah.

As mentioned in Halachah 6, this ruling applies even when the circumcision is being carried out on the Sabbath.

Since, as explained in the previous halachah, unless this flesh is removed, a second circumcision is necessary.

The Rambam’s wording is somewhat problematic. The Beit Yosef (Yoreh De’ah 264) explains that the Rambam’s intent is that we are not required to remove this flesh. In contrast, the Sha’agat Aryeh (Responsum 50) interprets the Rambam as stating that, once the mohel has interrupted his activity, he is forbidden to return and cut off the remaining flesh. (The Sha’agat Aryeh himself questions the Rambam’s decision. The Merkevet HaMishneh explains that since the circumcision is acceptable, it is forbidden to inflict further pain on the child.)
The Rama (Yoreh De’ah 264:5) rules that if the circumcision is performed during the week, one should remove this flesh. This ruling is followed throughout the Jewish community today.

The Babylonian Talmud relates that although pri’ah is not mentioned in the Torah, nor was Abraham commanded to carry out this activity, it is part of the oral tradition (halachah leMoshe miSinai), which may not be ignored (Shabbat 137b, Yevamot 71b). The Jerusalem Talmud (Yevamot 8:1) differs, and uses the principles of Biblical exegesis to derive the obligation of removing the membrane.

I.e., the circumcision was performed properly, but, nevertheless, these conditions were apparent. Were this condition to result from an improper circumcision, a second circumcision would be required. Since the circumcision was performed correctly, such measures are not necessary.

When the penis is extended and its flesh taut.

There is no need for the entire crown to be revealed; as long as one third of it is not covered by the flesh, it is acceptable (Terumat HaDeshen 264).

The flesh should be held back with bandages to prevent it from covering the crown. There is, however, no necessity for an additional operation even if these measures are not successful (Terumat HaDeshen, ibid.).

If more than two-thirds of the crown is covered.

The Rama (Yoreh De’ah 264:6) explains that, in this instance—in contrast to the original circumcision—it is not necessary to reveal the entire crown; it is necessary only to reveal a minimal portion.

Properly and all the flesh removed from the crown of the penis.

As mentioned in Chapter 1, Halachah 9, when a circumcision is carried out on the eighth day of a child’s life, it may be performed on the Sabbath, with the exception of several unique instances.

The three phases of the circumcision mentioned in Halachah 2.

This is permitted because, until these strands of flesh are removed, the obligation to circumcise the child on the eighth day has not been fulfilled. (See Halachah 3 and commentary.) Hence, just as we are allowed to carry out the operation on the Sabbath at the outset, we are allowed to complete its performance by removing these strands of flesh.

Even according to the opinion that allows one to return and remove these strands of flesh during the week, it is forbidden to do so on the Sabbath, because the circumcision is acceptable. Hence, no further cutting is permitted because of the Sabbath laws.

In general, medication may be applied on the Sabbath only when a danger to life is involved. The Sages considered circumcision to be in this category.

The license the Torah grants for circumcision to be performed on the Sabbath applies only to the deed of circumcision, which is itself a mitzvah. All the preparatory stages that make circumcision possible must be performed beforehand, for they are not elements of the actual performance of the mitzvah (Kiryat Sefer).

I.e., from a public domain to a private domain.

Here, there is no Scriptural prohibition involved.

Pesachim 92a cites this as an example of the power of Rabbinic law. Although karet (the punishment for not fulfilling the mitzvah of circumcision) is involved, the Sages enforced their decree against carrying in such places and forbade bringing the knife.

A compress that is prepared before the Sabbath may be applied on the Sabbath. It is, however, forbidden to prepare the compress on the Sabbath (see Hilchot Shabbat 23:11).

The mixture of wine and oil was applied to the wound to heal it.

According to Scriptural Law, a labor is forbidden on the Sabbath only when it is performed in its usual fashion. In most cases, however, such activities are forbidden by the Rabbis. Nevertheless, in this instance, since the herbs are being prepared for a remedy and they are not being prepared in the normal manner, the Sages did not forbid their preparation (see Hilchot Shabbat 21:26).

In Hilchot Shabbat 21:1, the Rambam defines a sh’vut as follows: [With regard to the Sabbath,] the Torah has told us, “You shall rest.” This implies that we are obligated to rest from the performance of [certain] activities even though they are not included among the forbidden labors. In Chapters 21 and 22 of those halachot, the Rambam explains the concept of sh’vut in detail.

In Hilchot Shabbat 6:9, the Rambam mentions this leniency with regard to bringing a shofar on Rosh HaShanah [i.e., in Jerusalem, to be sounded in the Temple]. Although Tosafot (Gittin 8b) maintain that the leniency should not be extended beyond the scope of the mitzvah of circumcision, the Rambam’s ruling is accepted by the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 307:5).

For this reason, a gentile may not be instructed to make a knife or boil water for the circumcision. (See Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 331:6.)

I.e., on the eighth day of a child’s life.

Thus, making a knife is forbidden on a festival. Nevertheless, carrying a knife through the public domain and heating water are permitted on a festival.

There are certain leniencies regarding the performance of labor on festivals when compared to the performance of labor on the Sabbath. Nevertheless, the performance of labor on festivals is also considered a Scriptural prohibition. (See Hilchot Sh’vitat Yom Tov 1:1.)

On festivals, we are allowed to perform any labor that is connected with the preparation of food. Since these herbs could be used for food, we are allowed to prepare them for the circumcision as well.

In this instance, only a Rabbinic prohibition is involved, and it is waived because of the importance of circumcision (Ma’aseh Rokeach).

The Rambam’s ruling depends on his statement (Hilchot Berachot 11:13) that if someone performs a blessing on behalf of another person, he should use the form “Who has sanctified us with Your commandments and commanded us concerning....”

In Hilchot Berachot 11:12, the Rambam states that when one fulfills a mitzvah on one’s own behalf, one should use the form “Who has sanctified us with Your commandments and commanded us to....”
Although the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De’ah 265:2) mentions the Rambam’s opinion, the Rama states that it is customary to recite the blessing “... concerning the circumcision,” at all times.
It is possible to explain that the Rama does not accept the Rambam’s general principle and prefers a universal form for a blessing to be recited every time a particular mitzvah is fulfilled. It is, however, also possible to interpret their difference of opinion as relating to the definition of the mitzvah of circumcision itself. The Rambam’s text of the blessing, which uses the form “... to...,” indicates that the nature of the mitzvah of circumcision focuses on the act of circumcision. In contrast, the Rama’s text for the blessing can be interpreted to imply that the nature of the mitzvah is to bring a person to the state that he is no longer uncircumcised. Therefore, the form “... concerning...” is more appropriate (Kinat Eliyahu).

The time when this blessing is recited is a matter of question. In two of his responsa, the Rambam writes that it makes no difference whether this blessing is recited before the circumcision or afterwards. Nevertheless, Rav Avraham, his son, and Rav Yitzchak, his grandson, state that it was the Rambam’s custom to recite this blessing before the mitzvah.
The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De’ah 265:1) quotes the opinion of Rabbenu Asher, who states that this blessing should be recited between the milah and the pri’ah.

Tosafot, Pesachim 7a, explain that this blessing is not one of the blessings connected with the performance of a mitzvah, but a blessing that expresses our thanks and appreciation to God for granting us this mitzvah.

The Ra’avad objects to the Rambam’s decision and rules that, in the absence of the father, the sandak (the person who holds the baby during the circumcision) should recite this blessing. The Rama (Yoreh De’ah 265:1) quotes this decision.

The literal translation of the Rambam’s phraseology is “If others are standing there.” The commentaries explain that his intent is also to emphasize that it is necessary to stand while attending a brit. (See the Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh De’ah 265:6, which states that, if possible, it is preferable to perform a circumcision with at least ten adult males in attendance.)

The Rambam’s version of this statement is found also in the Jerusalem Talmud (Berachot 9:3) and is quoted by the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De’ah 265:1). At present, however, it is customary to follow Rabbenu Asher’s opinion and say, “Just as he has entered the covenant, so may he enter...” without mentioning the father’s role. Significantly, this version is found in our texts of Shabbat 137b where this custom is mentioned.

We wish that the merit of the circumcision will lead to a life full of genuine Jewish conduct.

According to Ashkenazic custom, the blessing shehecheyanu is not recited over circumcision.

It appears that the Rambam considers this the only blessing recited in connection with the circumcision of converts, and would have this blessing recited before the circumcision. In contrast, the Tur and the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De’ah 268:5) explain that two blessings should be recited in connection with the circumcision of a convert:
a) one blessing before the circumcision, “... Who has sanctified us... and commanded us to circumcise converts,”
b) one blessing after the circumcision, the blessing quoted by the Rambam with the conclusion, “Blessed are You, God, Who establishes a covenant.”
According to the Shulchan Aruch’s perspective, like the blessing mentioned in the previous halachah, this blessing is not a blessing connected with the performance of the mitzvah, but an expression of praise for God for granting us the opportunity to perform such a unique mitzvah.
According to the Rambam’s view, it is somewhat difficult to understand: Why is this blessing so lengthy? In this context, the Sefer HaMaor explains that this blessing was instituted to reassure converts and strengthen their resolve before they fulfill a mitzvah that is associated with pain and suffering.

The Kessef Mishneh explains that this is a reference to the extraction of blood from converts who were circumcised previously. Other commentaries object to this interpretation, noting that in Halachah 6, the Rambam does not require a blessing in such an instance.

I.e., when the master performs the circumcision himself.

In this instance as well, the Tur and the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De’ah 267:12) rule that two blessings should be recited. See Note 9.

The reason for the change of text depends on the Rambam’s statements (Hilchot Berachot 11:11) that a person who performs a blessing on his own behalf should use the form, “Who has sanctified us... and commanded us to...” In contrast, one who performs a blessing on behalf of others should use the form, “... and commanded us concerning....”

This is because, as explained in Hilchot Kri’at Shema 3:16, it is forbidden to recite holy words in the presence of an exposed sexual organ.
There is somewhat of a problem, however, with the Rambam’s statements. Here, it appears that one need not cover the penis of a baby before reciting the blessing, yet in Hilchot Kri’at Shema (ibid.), the Rambam writes that the Shema may not be recited in the presence of a minor whose sexual organ is exposed.
In one of his responsa, the Rambam resolves this difficulty, explaining that the prohibition begins when the child—either male or female—possesses some sexual potency. (See also Siftei Cohen 265:18.)

In both cases, there is a doubt whether or not it is necessary to perform this circumcision. (See Chapter 1, Halachah 7.) Therefore, the circumcision is performed, but a blessing is not recited, lest there be no obligation to perform this activity, and thus, the blessing would be recited in vain. (See Hilchot Berachot 11:16.)

The Ra’avad contests this point, noting that when there is a doubt whether a certain activity fulfills a mitzvah or not, one should recite a blessing, and cites the recitation of blessings on the second day of festivals in the diaspora as an example of this principle.

In Hilchot Avodat Kochavim 10:1-2, the Rambam writes: If we see an idolater being swept away or drowning in the river, we should not help him. If we see that his life is in danger, we should not save him. It is, however, forbidden to cause one of them to sink or to push him into a pit or the like, since he is not waging war against us.... From the above, we can infer that it is forbidden to offer medical treatment to an idolater even when offered a wage. If, however, one is afraid of the consequences or fears that ill feeling will be aroused, one may treat them for a wage, but to treat them for free is forbidden. [Regarding] a ger toshav, since we are commanded to secure his well-being, he may be given medical treatment at no cost.
Many authorities maintain that the laws applying to a ger toshav can be applied to all gentiles who are not idolaters. Furthermore, since at present, a doctor would have much difficulty if he refused to treat gentiles, leniency should be shown in this regard.
From the above, it would appear that a doctor who operates a medical practice today is allowed to treat gentile patients. Indeed, throughout the ages, many great Rabbinic authorities, including the Rambam himself, served as doctors to gentiles.

In Hilchot Melachim 10:10, the Rambam writes that a gentile who desires to fulfill any mitzvah should be given the opportunity.
There are other authorities who differ with the Rambam on this matter. They explain that circumcision is a sign given to the Jewish people that establishes their uniqueness and it is improper that gentiles should be given the opportunity of possessing this property.

See the Guide for the Perplexed, Vol. III, Chapter 49, where the Rambam criticizes a hedonistic approach to life and explains that circumcision comes “to complete the perfection of our emotions... to reduce a person’s lust and wild cravings.”

. In the Hellenistic era, there were some Greek sympathizers among the Jewish people who would cause their foreskin to appear extended, so that they would not be distinguished from gentile athletes. The Sages were extremely critical of these individuals.

See Avot 3:14 and Hilchot Teshuvah 3:6.

As Exodus 4:24-26 relates, when Moses returned to Egypt, he took his newborn son, Eliezer, with him. He did not circumcise him immediately and, therefore, an angel came in the form of a snake and swallowed him. Tziporah his wife realized the source of the problem and circumcised her son. After this, the angel retracted. (See Nedarim 32a.)

In the Guide for the Perplexed, Vol. III, Chapter 49, the Rambam writes that the brit is a sign of the covenant of the oneness of God. “When a person is circumcised he enters into the covenant of Abraham which obligates him to know [God’s] unity.” This covenant of unity defines the nature of the Jewish people. It is natural that when people share a common sign, love and mutual assistance among them grow.

Peah 1:1.

The intent appears to be the passage, Numbers 28:1-8 which describes the offering of the daily sacrifice. See Hilchot Tefilah 7:11.

See Shabbat 127a.

Berachot 64a. These passages are recited in connection with the recitation of the blessings for Torah study. At present, in most communities, the passages of this paragraph is omitted from the beginning of the prayers.

Nechemiah 9:6-7. In most communities today, it is customary to recite these verses in the midst of Pesukei D’Zimra.

There is no such verse in the Tanach, Perhaps there is a scribal error and the intent was to read Exodus 15:18 and Psalms 72:19.

Today, it is universal custom to read this psalm in this place in the prayer service on festivals as well.

“A song of Ascents.” Psalms 120-134 are referred to in that manner, because they begin with those words. This custom is not followed in the Ashkenazic community at present. According to Sephardic and Chassidic custom, Psalms 121 to 124 are recited.