Motherhood VI: Berit • Deracheha

What are the halachot of berit mila? How do they relate to women?

In Brief

What is the source and halachic significance of mila (circumcision)?

Mila is first commanded in Bereishit both as the sign of God’s covenant (berit) with Avraham—promising progeny and the Land—and as a covenant in itself that acts as a marker of Jewish peoplehood. Alongside the Pesach offering, it is one of only two positive mitzvot whose deliberate non-performance carries the penalty of karet (spiritual excision).

Bringing a child for circumcision is an act of perfecting God’s creation, an act of submission to God, and an affirmation of membership in the Jewish people and covenant.

How does Halacha approach the medical safety and health of the infant?

The potential health benefits of circumcision are widely considered to outweigh risks. Halacha delays mila if the baby is unwell or at risk. To further minimize risk, halachic authorities endorse modern safety practices, such as using a sterile tube for metzitza (oral suction). Traditional practices, such as rapid circumcision and giving the infant wine to suck, help to alleviate pain.

Who is obligated in circumcision?

The obligation falls sequentially on: the father, the beit din (representing the community), and the individual himself as an adult. The mother is exempt, but according to one view, bears a special halachic responsibility for her son’s berit if the father is absent.

How are women connected to mila?

Women are full members of the broader covenant that it symbolizes. A woman is also considered “like one who is circumcised” by virtue of being an integral part of the Jewish people.

Additionally, a male infant becomes obligated in mila through being born to a Jewish mother. This is reflected in the beracha “asher kidash yedid mi-beten” (“Who sanctified the beloved one from the womb”), recited at circumcision.

May a woman perform a berit mila?

The Talmud presents on a debate on this point.

While many authorities consider berit mila performed by a woman to be valid, at least after the fact, the widely accepted halacha is to actively seek out a male mohel.

Can a woman serve as a sandakit, holding the baby during the ceremony?

Women served as sandakit (also called ba’alat berit) in early medieval Ashkenaz, but Maharam of Rothenburg opposed this out of concern for tzeniut , and Rema rules accordingly. Standard practice today is for a woman to take the role of kvatterin, bringing the infant to the entrance of the ceremony.

What other active ritual and prayer roles can women fill in a berit mila?

Historically, mothers drank from the wine at the berit ceremony and prayers were dedicated to the mother’s healing. These practices can be revived, with the potential addition of a mother reciting birkat ha-gomel. Women can also serve as kvatterin.

In a response to Deracheha, Rav Baruch Gigi, Rosh Yeshivat Har Etzion, permits women to be honored with naming the infant and with reciting Ha-Rachaman prayers at the end of Birkat Ha-Mazon.

In Depth

By Laurie Novick
Rav Ezra Bick, Ilana Elzufon, and Shayna Goldberg, eds.

Mila

Previously, we explored birth rituals such as the zeved ha-bat and shalom zachar. We now turn to mitzvot that follow the birth of a baby boy, with an emphasis on how they relate to women. In this piece we discuss mila, circumcision. Our next piece will look at pidyon ha-ben, redemption of the firstborn.

Mila is the second mitzva to appear in the Torah, and one of only three in Bereishit.¹ It is presented as part of God’s berit (covenant) with Avraham, which also entails a promise of progeny and the Land.

בראשית יז: ז–יד

וַהֲקִמֹתִי אֶת בְּרִיתִי בֵּינִי וּבֵינֶךָ וּבֵין זַרְעֲךָ אַחֲרֶיךָ לְדֹרֹתָם לִבְרִית עוֹלָם לִהְיוֹת לְךָ לֵאלֹקִים וּלְזַרְעֲךָ אַחֲרֶיךָ: וְנָתַתִּי לְךָ וּלְזַרְעֲךָ אַחֲרֶיךָ אֵת אֶרֶץ מְגֻרֶיךָ אֵת כָּל אֶרֶץ כְּנַעַן לַאֲחֻזַּת עוֹלָם וְהָיִיתִי לָהֶם לֵאלֹקִים: וַיֹּאמֶר אֱלֹקִים אֶל אַבְרָהָם וְאַתָּה אֶת בְּרִיתִי תִשְׁמֹר אַתָּה וְזַרְעֲךָ אַחֲרֶיךָ לְדֹרֹתָם: זֹאת בְּרִיתִי אֲשֶׁר תִּשְׁמְרוּ בֵּינִי וּבֵינֵיכֶם וּבֵין זַרְעֲךָ אַחֲרֶיךָ הִמּוֹל לָכֶם כָּל זָכָר: וּנְמַלְתֶּם אֵת בְּשַׂר עָרְלַתְכֶם וְהָיָה לְאוֹת בְּרִית בֵּינִי וּבֵינֵיכֶם: וּבֶן שְׁמֹנַת יָמִים יִמּוֹל לָכֶם כָּל זָכָר לְדֹרֹתֵיכֶם יְלִיד בָּיִת וּמִקְנַת כֶּסֶף מִכֹּל בֶּן נֵכָר אֲשֶׁר לֹא מִזַּרְעֲךָ הוּא: הִמּוֹל יִמּוֹל יְלִיד בֵּיתְךָ וּמִקְנַת כַּסְפֶּךָ וְהָיְתָה בְרִיתִי בִּבְשַׂרְכֶם לִבְרִית עוֹלָם: וְעָרֵל זָכָר אֲשֶׁר לֹא יִמּוֹל אֶת בְּשַׂר עָרְלָתוֹ וְנִכְרְתָה הַנֶּפֶשׁ הַהִוא מֵעַמֶּיהָ אֶת בְּרִיתִי הֵפַר:

Bereishit 17:7–14

And I will establish My covenant between Me and you and your seed after you for their generations as an eternal covenant to be your God and for your seed after you. And I will give you and your seed after you the land of your sojourning, all of the Land of Canaan as an eternal land holding, and I will be for them God. And God said to Avraham: And you shall keep My covenant, you and your seed after you for their generations. This is my covenant that you will keep between Me and you and your seed after you: Every male shall be circumcised for you. And you shall be circumcised in the flesh of your foreskins, and it will be a sign of the covenant between Me and you. At the age of eight days every male will surely be circumcised for you for your generations, born in your household or acquired with silver from every foreigner that is not of your seed. Those born in your household and those acquired with silver shall surely be circumcised, and My covenant will be in your flesh as an eternal covenant. And an uncircumcised male of whom the flesh of his foreskin is not circumcised, that soul shall be cut off from its people, he has violated My covenant.

In this passage, circumcision is described both as a berit in itself (zot beriti, this is My covenant) and as a sign of this berit (ve-haya le-ot berit, and it will be a sign of the covenant).

The final verse here is significant for our halachic understanding of mila as a key element in Jewish peoplehood. Along with the mitzva to bring the Pesach offering, which marks the national emergence of benei Yisrael, mila is one of only two positive mitzvot for which non-performance carries a penalty of karet, spiritual excision.

A midrash explains that benei Yisrael were redeemed from Egypt through the combined merit of these two mitzvot:

מכילתא דרבי ישמעאל בא – מסכתא דפסחא פרשה ה

ואת ערום ועריה וגו’ (יחזקאל טז:ז) ערום מכל מצות. נתן להם הקדוש ברוך הוא שתי מצות, דם פסח ודם מילה, שיתעסקו בם כדי שיגאלו

Mechilta de-Rabbi Yishmael, Bo - Masechta De-Pischa 5

“And you were naked and bare” (Yechezkel 16:7), naked of all mitzvot. God gave them two mitzvot: the blood of the Pesach sacrifice and the blood of mila, for them to occupy themselves with so that they would be redeemed.

Further emphasizing the centrality of this mitzva, the Talmud teaches that mila is one of the three threshold acts for male converts joining the Jewish people, because it brought our forefathers into the covenant:²

כריתות ט.

רבי אומר: ככם כאבותיכם. מה אבותיכם לא נכנסו לברית אלא במילה וטבילה והרצאת דם, אף הם לא יכנסו לברית אלא במילה וטבילה והרצאת דמים

Keritot 9a

Rabbi [Yehuda Ha-Nassi] says: You are like your forefathers. Just as your forefathers only entered into the berit through mila and [mikveh] immersion and sacrifice, so too they [prospective male converts] only enter the covenant through mila and immersion and sacrifice.

Meaning

The passage in Bereishit gives special insight into the religious meaning of mila. Note how often the word “berit” is repeated; in chapter 17 (of which we have cited only an excerpt) it appears a full thirteen times. In the Talmud, this repetition becomes a reason to give special weight to the mitzva of mila

נדרים לא:

רבי ישמעאל אומר גדולה מילה שנכרתו עליה שלש עשרה בריתות

Nedarim 31b

Rabbi Yishmael says: Mila is great, for thirteen covenants were hewn over it.

The mitzva reappears in Vayikra in a more legal context, where it is presented chronologically as following a woman’s initial seven days of impurity after the birth of a son:

ויקרא יב: ב–ד

דַּבֵּר אֶל בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל לֵאמֹר אִשָּׁה כִּי תַזְרִיעַ וְיָלְדָה זָכָר וְטָמְאָה שִׁבְעַת יָמִים כִּימֵי נִדַּת דְּוֹתָהּ תִּטְמָא: וּבַיּוֹם הַשְּׁמִינִי יִמּוֹל בְּשַׂר עָרְלָתוֹ:

Vayikra 12:2–4

Speak to benei Yisrael saying: A woman when she conceives and gives birth to a male, she will be ritually impure seven days; as in the days of her nidda sickness she will be impure. And on the eighth day the flesh of his foreskin will be circumcised.

In our previous piece, we discussed how the end of the first week of life converges with the night before a berit mila. Here, we consider what it might mean for the berit mila to have been commanded to come specifically at the end of the first week of life.

Maharal posits that the number seven is often associated with processes connected to the natural world, like the ritual impurity associated with birth, death, or menstruation. The number eight represents something beyond the natural:

מהר”ל תפארת ישראל ב

…הטבע שנברא בשבעה ימי בראשית. וכן כל דבר שהוא על הטבע, והוא תיקון מה שחסר הטבע, הוא אחר השבעה. וזה הוא טעם מילה בשמיני, כי האדם מצד הטבע נברא עם הערלה, והוא פחיתות הטבע. והמילה היא תיקון הטבע…

Maharal, Tiferet Yisrael 2

…Nature which was created in the seven days of Creation. And so anything which is above nature, and it is a rectification of what nature lacks, is after the seven. And this is the rationale for mila on the eighth [day], for a man from the aspect of nature is created with a foreskin, and that is a deficiency in nature. And circumcision is the rectification of nature…

Maharal’s explanation of the significance of the eighth day also references an idea articulated by Rabbi Akiva in dialogue with the Roman consul Tineius Rufus (in rabbinic literature, Turnusrufus), that circumcision exemplifies how humankind completes or perfects God’s creation.

מדרש תנחומא, תזריע ז

שאל טורנוסרופוס הרשע את ר’ עקיבא…למה אתם מולים, א”ל [=אמר לו]…מעשה בשר ודם הם נאים משל הקדוש ברוך הוא, הביאו לי שבולים וגלוסקאות… אלו מעשה הקדוש ברוך הוא ואלו מעשה בשר ודם, אין אלו נאים, א”ל [=אמר לו] טורנוסרופוס הואיל הוא חפץ במילה, למה אינו יוצא מהול ממעי אמו, א”ל [=אמר לו] ר’ עקיבא ולמה שוררו יוצא בו, לא תחתוך אמו שוררו, ולמה אינו יוצא מהול, לפי שלא נתן הקדוש ברוך הוא לישראל את המצות אלא כדי לצרף בהן, לכך אמר דוד (כל) אמרת ה’ צרופה וגו’ (תהלים יח:לא)

Midrash Tanchuma, Tazria 7

Turnusrufus the wicked asked Rabbi Akiva:…Why are you [Jews] circumcised? [Rabb Akiva] said to him:…The works of flesh and blood are more pleasing than those of God, bring me sheaves and cakes…These are the works of God and these are the works of flesh and blood, are they not pleasing? Turnusrufus said to him: Since He desires circumcision, why does one not come out circumcised from his mother’s insides? Rabbi Akiva said to him: And why does his umbilical cord come out with him? Should his mother not cut his umbilical cord? And why does he not come out circumcised? Because God gave Israel the mitzvot only in order to be refined through them. Thus David said: “God’s utterance is refined…” (Tehillim 18:31).

The end of the midrash expands this initial idea by drawing a fascinating parallel between a mother’s cutting of the umbilical cord and berit mila, traditionally performed by the father. Cutting the cord is a human intervention that is important for the newborn’s health.³ By introducing it into this midrash, Rabbi Akiva makes a few important claims: First, human actions to protect a newborn physically can serve as a model for actions to perfect a newborn from a spiritual perspective. Second, when performed in fulfillment of a mitzva, human partnership in perfecting creation also refines human character. As Rabbi Akiva notes, both parents have important roles to play in preparing the newborn for life.

Why should a Jewish boy’s life begin with a surgical procedure?

It can be emotionally difficult to have a baby circumcised. Why should a healthy newborn undergo a painful procedure that will permanently alter his body, especially when he is too young to give consent?

These are serious concerns.

On a medical level, the potential health benefits of circumcision are widely understood to outweigh the risks of the procedure. Nevertheless, the decision of whether a baby should undergo circumcision is usually left up to the parents.⁴ In recent years, as medical research has established that newborn babies can experience pain, discussion of pain relief for circumcision has come to the fore.

Halacha prohibits mila if a baby is not healthy enough to undergo it, and defines health stringently for these purposes. Where there are any medical concerns, Halacha directs us to delay mila until it is considered safe.

Other safety measures, such as the use of a sterile tube for performing metzitza (oral suction after the berit originally meant to help the blood clot), have been widely adopted by halachic authorities to further limit risk to infants.⁵

Regarding pain, ritual circumcision performed by an expert mohel has the advantage of being very rapid, typically quicker than it would be to provide a local injection of anesthetic. Additionally, the traditional practice of giving a child wine to suck serves a scientifically-recognized analgesic function, now often filled by a designated glucose solution. Holding the child attentively skin-to-skin, as done by a sandak, has also been shown to reduce neonatal pain.⁶

In a landmark article, Rabbi Dr. Avraham Steinberg summarizes more modern options for pain relief. He ultimately supports offering parents the option of using Emla, a desensitizing cream:⁷

Rabbi Avraham Steinberg, MD, “Anesthesia in Circumcision Medical and Halachic Consideration,” ASSIA: Jewish Medical Ethics VI, no. 1 (2007): 15–24

In principle “its ways are ways of pleasantness, and its paths are peaceful.” If it is clear that there is significant pain in circumcision and that the pain can be prevented without violating any prohibition, it would seem that we should be lenient, not strict. It follows that the only acceptable reason to be strict is the possibility of endangering the person being circumcised….On the other hand, it must be emphasized that there is a significant difference between “surgical removal of the foreskin” as performed for medical purposes (even by non-Jews) and “ritual circumcision” as performed by mohalim for the purpose of fulfilling the commandment….The experienced, professional mohel, however, performs the procedure very quickly without a clamp. In this way the duration and intensity of the pain is much lower than in the cases described in the American medical literature. We should also distinguish between two cases: (1) injected anesthesia that fully anesthetizes the penis. This procedure involves some danger and must be performed by a qualified physician; (2) using anesthetic cream, which attenuates the pain but does not eliminate it entirely. This procedure involves no danger and can be performed by a mohel.

Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach also supported the use of analgesic cream for berit mila when considered safe. Some authorities limit its use to cases where the baby is perceived as more weak.⁸

With medical concerns addressed, parents may nevertheless be left with a sense of general unease around mila. Some of this may be addressed in our earliest sources. For example, the dialogue we quoted earlier between Rabbi Akiva and Tineius Rufus responds to resistance to removing a natural part of the body. According to this midrash, berit mila does not mar a perfect creation but rather perfects and refines the male body.

We have also seen that berit mila is a classic identifying marker of Jewish peoplehood.

Yet another approach to berit mila draws a parallel to the service of God through sacrifice:

מדרש תנחומא וירא ו

זרע יעבדנו יסופר לה’ לדור (תהלים כב:לא). א”ר [=אמר רבי] יצחק: נאמר במילה עבודה ונאמר בקרבנות עבודה. מה עבודה האמורה בקרבנות דמים, אף עבודה האמורה במילה דמים. למה זרע יעבדנו? כיון שאדם מטיף טיפה אחת של דם, היא חביבה לפני הקדוש ברוך הוא כקרבנות

Tanchuma, Veyera 6

“The seed that serves Him will be told of God for generations” (Tehillim 22:31). Rabbi Yitzchak said: “Service” is said regarding mila, and “service” is said regarding sacrifices. Just as the service said regarding sacrifice is with blood, so the service said regarding mila is with blood. Why “the seed that serves him”? Since a man draws a single drop of blood [in mila], it is beloved before God like sacrifices.

In a piece originally published in the Israeli religious weekly Makor Rishon, Dr. Renana Ravitzky Pilzer, who wrote her dissertation on traditional Jewish conceptual approaches to berit mila,⁹ highlights the tension between natural parental concern and a wider sense of responsibility to community and to God:¹⁰

ד”ר רננה רביצקי פילזר, “מילה של אמא”, מקור ראשון 14.3.19

הדיון הגלוי והסמוי, המודע והלא מודע, המתקיים היום בחברה הישראלית סביב ברית המילה, משקף צומת של מפגש בין רצונות ותפיסות ערכיות. הרצון ההורי לגונן ולסוכך על הילד מתנגש הן עם הצו הדתי החד משמעי והן עם החובה התרבותית-זהותית לשייך את הילד לחברה בה יחיה. ההורים, העומדים במרכזו של הטקס, נדרשים להכריע הכרעה דתית-תרבותית משמעותית ולהציגה בפרהסיה, אל מול פני הקהילה….יש הבאים למסור נפשם על אמונתם, למול עם עורלת בנם גם את עורלת לבבם, לבקש קרבה באמצעות קרבן. אחרים מבקשים להטביע ברך הנולד חוויה של בשר אשר תזהה אותו באופן בלתי הפיך עם חברה וקהילה; לטעת בו מסורות עתיקות ולחברו לתרבות קבוצתית. אלו חשים את כובד משקלה של העקידה, את נטל הניסיון הדתי, את ההקדש, ואלו חשים את חיבוקה של הקהילה, את כובד משקלם של דורות עברו ואת נטל האחריות על הדורות שיבואו; אלו חווים חוויה דתית ואלו חוויה חברתית; אלו מביטים למעלה ומעבר ואלו מתבוננים אל עבריהם סביב; אלו חשים חובה ואלו זכות. ואני, מתקשרים בי אלו ואלו ואני נעה בין המשמעויות השונות: פעמים מרכינה ראש, פעמים בוחרת, פעמים מתייצבת מול הנשגב, פעמים מול האדם.

Dr. Renana Ravitzky Pilzer, “A Mother’s Mila,” Makor Rishon, March 14, 2019

The discussion—overt and hidden, conscious and unconscious—taking place today in Israeli society around berit mila, reflects a meeting-point between value-based desires and outlooks. The parental desire to defend and protect a child conflicts both with the absolute religious command and with the cultural-identity obligation to affiliate the child with the society in which he will live. The parents, who stand at the center of the ceremony, are required to make a significant religio-cultural decision and to present it publicly, before the community…There are [parents] who give themselves over to their faith, who circumcise the foreskin of their hearts along with their son’s foreskin, seeking closeness [to God] through sacrifice. Others seek to brand the newborn in the flesh, to irreversibly identify him with the society and community; to imbue him with ancient traditions and connect him to a collective culture. These [the first category of parents] feel the weight of the akeida, the burden of the religious trial, the sanctification; while these [the second category] feel the embrace of the community, the weight of past generations and the burden of responsibility for the generations to come. These experience a religious experience, while these experience a social one. These look up and beyond, while these look around them. These feel an obligation, and these a privilege. As for me, I connect to both of these and I fluctuate between the different meanings: sometimes bowing my head and sometimes choosing; sometimes presenting myself before the sublime, sometimes before my fellow man.

For Dr. Ravitzky Pilzer, it is identifying with one or both of these pulls, religious submission and commitment to the Jewish people, that ultimately enables parents to continue to participate in this mitzva and consider it the best choice for their child.

While a woman is not herself circumcised, she is part of the broader covenant with the Jewish people that berit mila represents and has additional opportunities to help her children on the path to being refined by Torah and mitzvot. In his discussion of women mentioning berit mila in the second blessing of birkat ha-mazon, Meiri remarks on the significance of berit mila to a Jewish woman as a function of her membership in the Jewish people:

בית הבחירה למאירי, ברכות מח:

ונשים יש אומ[רים] שאין מזכירות ברית…ולדעתנו אף הנשים אומרות כן…שהרי בכלל ישראל הם ועל ישראל הן אומרות כך.

Beit Ha-bechira, Berachot 48b

There are those who say that women don’t mention berit [in birkat ha-mazon]…and in our opinion, even women say this…for they are a part of [the people of] Israel, and they are referring to [the people of] Israel when saying this.

Mitzva

We have seen that there is a mitzva for baby boys to be circumcised at eight days old—an age at which the infant himself cannot take an active role. Who, then, is obligated to perform this mitzva? What is a woman’s role in the mitzva of mila?

The question of who is obligated in berit mila arises in the Talmud:

קידושין כט.

מתני’ כל מצות הבן על האב אנשים חייבין ונשים פטורות…[גמ’] תנינא להא דת”ר [=דתנו רבנן] האב חייב בבנו למולו…למולו מנלן? דכתיב וימל אברהם את יצחק בנו. והיכא דלא מהליה אבוה מיחייבי בי דינא למימהליה דכתיב המול לכם כל זכר. והיכא דלא מהליה בי דינא מיחייב איהו למימהל נפשיה דכתיב וערל זכר אשר לא ימול את בשר ערלתו ונכרתה. איהי מנלן דלא מיחייבא? דכתיב כאשר צוה אותו אלקים אותו ולא אותה.

Kiddushin 29a

Mishna: All mitzvot concerning the son [incumbent] on the father, men are obligated and women are exempt…[Gemara] We learned the mishna in accordance with that [baraita] which our rabbis taught: The father is obligated regarding his son to circumcise him…Whence do we know [that he is obligated to] circumcise him? As it is written, “And Avraham circumcised his son, Yitzchak.” And where his father did not circumcise him, the beit din is obligated to circumcise him, as it is written: “Every male shall be circumcised for you [plural].” And where the beit din did not circumcise him, he is obligated to circumcise himself, as it is written: “And an uncircumcised male of whom the flesh of his foreskin is not circumcised, that soul shall be cut off.” She [the mother], whence do we know that she is not obligated? As it is written, “as God commanded him”—“him” and not “her.”

According to this passage, the mitzva is incumbent first on the father, then on the beit din, and finally on the person himself, while the mother is exempt on the basis of the verse singling out “him,” Avraham, as obligated.

Early authorities discuss the nature and extent of the mother’s exemption, often in response to a fundamental question on this passage: Why do we need a verse to teach us that women are exempt from mila? Since mila is performed only during the day,¹¹ shouldn’t it be considered a positive, time-bound commandment, from which women would be exempt?¹² Rav Yeshaya deTrani explains:

תוספות רי”ד, קידושין כט., ד”ה איהי מנלן

…אי קשיא: ומאי איצטרכינן לקרא? תיפוק לי[ה] דהויא לה מילה מצוה שהזמן גרמא…תשובה: היכי אמרינן דמצות עשה שהזמן גרמא נשים פטורות? הני מילי מצוה דתליא בגופה והיא אינה מצווה אלא לזמן ידוע ולא בכל זמן. אבל מצוה דלא תליא בגופה, כגון למול את בנה, אף על גב דמילת הבן יש לה זמן, נהי דקבוע הזמן לבן הנימול, אבל האב שציוהו הבורא להתעסק במילת בנו, העסק ההוא אין לו זמן שבין ביום ובין בלילה יטרח ויכין צרכי מילת בנו. והלכך אי לאו אותו הוה מחייבינן גם האשה…

Tosafot Rid, Kiddushin 29a, s.v. Ihi

If it is difficult: Why do we need a verse, we should derive it from mila being a positive time-bound commandment…Response: Where do we say that women are exempt from a positive time-bound commandment? This applies to a mitzva that is incumbent on her as a person, and that is commanded only for a specific time and not at every time. But a mitzva that is not incumbent on her as a person, like circumcising her son, even though circumcising the son has a time, the time is set for the son being circumcised, but the father whom the Creator commanded to occupy himself with his son’s circumcision, that occupation has no [set] time, for whether day or night he will make an effort and prepare the needs of his son’s circumcision. And therefore, were it not for [the word] “him,” we would have obligated the woman as well…

Without the verse, we might have thought that a mother is obligated to circumcise her son because a parent can be busy with preparations to fulfill the mitzva at any time of day or night. Note that, according to Rav Yeshaya, even a father is not personally obligated to perform the circumcision but rather to ensure that it is completed. This is subject to debate, with many authorities, notably Rambam, maintaining that the father is personally obligated to perform the circumcision himself.¹³

There are three main ways to view a woman’s exemption from the mitzva of her son’s mila:

I. Total exemption: Ritva’s answer to this question also relates to the obligation of the beit din in the absence of a willing and able father. The beit din’s obligation can really be seen as an obligation on the Jewish people as a whole to see to it that the baby is circumcised. The court would ordinarily take care of this as agents of the people, but in theory any Jew could have a role. Ritva suggests that the Talmud, and the verse regarding Avraham, come to teach us that a woman is exempted even from this type of responsibility:

חדושי הריטב”א, קידושין כט., ד”ה ואיהי מנא לן

וכי תימא למה לי קרא תיפוק לי דהא מצות עשה שהזמן גרמא היא דמילה ביום ולא בלילה ונשים פטורות, איכא למימר דהתם הוא במצוה דנפשה אבל הכא במצוה דבנה, הוה אמינא דמחייבא דלא גרעה מבית דין דמחייבי למימהליה. להכי איצטריך קרא למיפטרה…

Ritva, Kiddushin 29a, s.v. Ve-ihi mena lan

And if you say why do I need the verse, I should derive it from it being a positive time-bound commandment—for circumcision is during the day and not at night—and women are exempt, one can say that there [the exemption] is with a mitzva for herself, but here it is a mitzva for her son, and I would have said that she is obligated, for she is not inferior to the beit din, which is obligated to circumcise him. For this the verse is needed to exempt her…

II. Obligation like any Jew: In contrast, in the eighteenth century, Rav Pinchas Horowitz argued that when the father will not take care of circumcising his son, the mother does have an obligation to ensure that this happens, as part of the general obligation of the beit din or the Jewish People:

המקנה, קידושין כט.

לכאורה משמע דאשה אינה בכלל מצות מילה כלל, אלא דצ”ע [=דצריך עיון] כיון דבאמת איכא תרי קראי, חד לחיוב כל ישראל מקרא דהמול לכם כל זכר…וחד לחיוב האב על הבן. א”כ [=אם כן] נהי דמיעטא התורה גבי חיוב האב על הבן אותו ולא אותה, היינו דאינה מחויבת יותר מכל ישראל כמו האב. אבל בקרא דהמול לכם כל זכר דלא כתיב ביה מיעוטא, ממילא אשה נמי בת חיובא היא.

Sefer Ha-makneh, Kiddushin 29a

It would seem that [the gemara] implies that a woman is not included in the mitzva of mila at all, but this requires study, since in truth there are two verses, one to obligate all of Israel from the verse of “every male shall be circumcised for you” …and one to obligate the father for the son. If so, given that the Torah excluded her with respect to the father’s obligation for the son, “‘him’” and not her,” i.e., she is not obligated more than the rest of Israel as the father is. But in the verse of “every male shall be circumcised for you,” where there is no exclusion written, a woman is also subject to the obligation.

III. Special obligation in place of the father: In the thirteenth century, Rav Chayyim Or Zarua argues that a mother does have a special obligation. Her obligation comes after that of the father and precedes that of the beit din:

שו”ת מהר”ח אור זרוע סימן יא

כגון שאביו ואמו היו חבושין. התם נמי אין מוטל על האחרים לעסוק במילתו של זה עד שיצא אביו מבית האסורין. ונראה לפי הענין, שב”ד [=שבית דין] בההיא שעתא לא מיחייבי ביה כי היו בטוחין שאביו יצא ויעסוק במילתו. ואם אמו לא היתה חבושה, היא היתה חייבת לעסוק דלא ממעט לה קרא אלא היכא דאיתיה לאבוה.

Responsa Maharach Or Zarua 11

In cases like his father and his mother being imprisoned. There also, it is not cast upon others to occupy themselves with the circumcision of this [baby] until the father has come out of prison. And it seems according to the matter that the beit din at that time is not obligated in it because they are certain the father will get out and occupy himself with his circumcision. And if his mother were not imprisoned, she would be obligated to occupy herself, for the verse only excluded her when the father is there.

In practice, when a father cannot arrange for his son’s circumcision (e.g., if he is no longer alive, or seriously ill, or otherwise unavailable), the mother usually makes the key arrangements or decisions for the mila, and the community steps in to help practically or financially as necessary. The debate concerns whether the measures she takes are considered a fulfillment of an obligation incumbent on her.

Mohelet

Can a woman perform the berit mila?

In the cryptic story of Moshe’s journey to Egypt with his family, Tzipora performs a berit mila on their son:¹⁴

שמות ד: כה

וַתִּקַּח צִפֹּרָה צֹר וַתִּכְרֹת אֶת עָרְלַת בְּנָהּ וַתַּגַּע לְרַגְלָיו וַתֹּאמֶר כִּי חֲתַן דָּמִים אַתָּה לִי:

Shemot 4:25

And Tzipora took a flint and excised the foreskin of her son, and she touched it to his legs and said, for you are a bridegroom of blood for me.

While this verse might seem to be a strong precedent for recognizing circumcision performed by a woman as valid, the Talmud raises the possibility that it could be read differently, as Tzipora facilitating the circumcision rather than performing it.¹⁵

עבודה זרה כז.

ומי איכא למאן דאמר אשה לא? והכתיב “ותקח צפורה צר”, קרי ביה ותקח. והכתיב “ותכרות”, קרי ביה “ותכרת”, דאמרה לאיניש אחרינא ועבד. ואיבעית אימא: אתיא איהי ואתחלה ואתא משה ואגמרה:

Avoda Zara 27a

Is there someone who says that a woman cannot [perform mila]? But it is written, “And Tzipora took a flint.” Read it “and she caused [someone else] to take.” But it is written, “and she cut” [va-tichrot]. Read it as: “and she caused [him] to cut” [va-tachret], that she told another person and he did it. And if you like, say: She came and began it [the mila] and Moshe came and completed it.

Lack of a decisive precedent for a woman performing a valid mila leaves room for the Talmud to consider the possibility that a woman’s performance of circumcision would not be valid. The talmudic discussion begins with the question of why a circumcision performed by a non-Jew is halachically invalid. Rabbi Yochanan and the amora Rav cite different prooftexts (both drawn from the passage in Bereishit 17 that we saw above). The Talmud ultimately concludes that the practical difference between their positions is the case of a woman performing circumcision.

עבודה זרה כז.

מנין למילה בעובד כוכבים שהיא פסולה? דרו בר פפא משמיה דרב אמר: ואתה את בריתי תשמור. ורבי יוחנן: המול ימול…איכא בינייהו אשה. למ”ד [=למאן דאמר] ואתה את בריתי תשמור ליכא דאשה לאו בת מילה היא. ולמ”ד [=ולמאן דאמר] המול ימול איכא דאשה כמאן דמהילא דמיא.

Avoda Zara 27a

Whence that mila performed by an idolator is invalid? Daro bar Papa said in the name of Rav: “And you shall keep my covenant.” And Rabbi Yochanan: “He shall surely be circumcised [himol yimol].”…There is a difference between them: a woman [circumcising]. For he who says “and you shall keep my covenant,” it is not [valid], for a woman is not subject to mila [herself]. And for he who says “himol yimol,” it is [valid], for a woman is considered like one who is circumcised.

According to Rav, the key verse in the Torah with regard to circumcision is one about keeping [God’s] covenant. This is understood as referring specifically to fulfilling the obligation of circumcision. That would exclude a woman, who is exempt from circumcision.

According to Rabbi Yochanan, the key verse is “he shall surely be circumcised .” Rashi explains, based on an alternative vocalization, that this indicates that the one performing circumcision must be circumcised.

רש”י עבודה זרה כז.

המול ימול – קרי ביה המל ימול מי שהוא מהול ימול אחרים.

Rashi ad loc

Himol yimol [he shall surely be circumcised]: Read it as hamal yimol [the one who circumcises shall be circumcised], one who is circumcised shall circumcise others.

In a counterintuitive turn, a woman is considered to fall within this category because she is “like one who is circumcised.”¹⁶ Why should this be the case? Rav Achai Gaon rejects the idea that this simply refers to a woman’s lack of a foreskin in favor of a more conceptual reading:

שאילתות דרב אחאי, פרשת וירא, שאילתא י

אשה מה היא לממהל? אמרינן…נשים לא אף על גב דלאו איכא ערלה, מידי דהוה אגוי מהול? או דלמא שום ישראל מהולין מתקרן, לא שנא גברי ולא שנא נשי…

Sheiltot of Rav Achai Gaon, Vayera 10

A woman, may she perform circumcision? Do we say…women may not, even though there is no foreskin, since it is like a circumcised non-Jew? Or perhaps the name of Israel is such that they [all Jews] are called circumcised, it makes no difference if they are men or women.

According to Rav Achai Gaon, a woman is halachically considered to be like someone who is circumcised, by definition, simply on the strength of being an integral part of the Jewish people.

How are women part of the berit in berit mila?

The mitzva of mila is closely associated with covenant, to the point that it is called berit mila or a beris for short. In what way are women part of this covenant?

The Talmud’s statement that “a woman is considered like one who is circumcised”— especially as understood by Rav Achai Ga’on, as an expression of a woman’s membership in the Jewish people and not merely her anatomy—suggests that women do indeed have some sort of direct connection to berit mila.

In a close reading of the passage from Bereishit, Rav Shamshon Rephael Hirsch distinguishes between the physical element of the mitzva and what removing the foreskin symbolizes:

רש”ר הירש בראשית יז:י

יש לשים לב לכך, שהמילה עצמה קרויה כאן “ברית”; הוה אומר: עצם מעשה המילה יש בו משום שמירת הברית. ואילו בפסוק השני היא קרויה “אות ברית” – אות המסמלת את הברית; ומכאן, ששמירת הברית היא יותר ממעשה המילה…במצוות סמליות נצטוינו מפי ה’ – לא רק לזכור את הרעיון המסומל בהן – אלא בראש ובראשונה לקיים את מעשה המצוה. ולעולם לא תוכל זכירת הרעיון לבוא במקום עשיית המעשה….אך מאידך: קיום המעשה לא השיג את תכליתו במלואה, – אלא אם כן הוא היה ל”אות”; כאות נשים אותו על לבנו, ונחיה בקרבנו את הרעיון המסומל בו. ואף על פי כן: עשיית המעשה היא ראשית קיום המצוה; במעשה נבטא את הרעיון כמאמר ה’ לעד.

Rav Shamshon Rephael Hirsch, Bereishit 17:10 (Isaac Levy translation)

In a striking manner the Mila itself is first called berit so that the performance of it itself seems to be fulfilling the covenant, and then, in the following verse it is declared to be ot berit, the sign of the covenant, as a symbol to represent the berit, so that the fulfilment of the covenant itself must be something transcending the mere act of the circumcision…At symbolic commands, not only is the perpetuation of the idea of which the act is symbolic important and necessary, but in the first instance the actual performance of the prescribed procedure is an inviolable law of God, which can never be dispensed with or its place taken by keeping the idea…On the other hand, performing the act, only then achieves its full purpose when it does become an ot, a symbol, if it is taken to heart as such and the idea it expresses becomes a reality for us. But doing the act itself still remains the first carrying out of the command of God. What the act is to accomplish is, that through it the idea is constantly expressed by us as a declaration of God…

Rav Hirsch emphasizes that berit mila forms a covenant in and of itself, while simultaneously representing the covenantal promise to the Avot of land and progeny. Circumcision is indeed an essential covenantal act, but it is also a symbol of God’s entire covenant with Avraham and his descendants, whether male or female.

This idea might be supported by Rabbeinu Tam’s understanding of the two distinct berachot recited over mila: a standard birkat ha-mitzva recited before the act of mila, and a second beracha “lehachniso bi-vrito shel Avraham avinu,” a beracha of praise and thanksgiving over the baby’s entry into the covenant of our forefather Avraham.

ספר הישר לרבינו תם (חלק החדושים) סימן רפה

…אחרי שמל שצריך לומ[ר] להכניסו בבריתו של אברהם אבינו דהכי תניא בבריית[א]. ואין לומר כאן כל המצות כולן מברך עליהן עובר לעשייתן שאינה אלא להעיד על המילה…..הברית שבינינו לבין המקום ברוך הוא…מברך אחר מילתו שזכה להכניסו בברית.

Sefer Ha-yashar of Rabbeinu Tam (Novellae) 285

…After he circumcises, that he needs to say “to bring him into the covenant of Avraham Avinu,” for this is taught in the baraita. And the principle that “for all mitzvot, one recites a beracha on them before they are performed,” does not apply here, for this [beracha] is only to give testimony over the mila…the covenant between us and God blessed be He…he recites the beracha after his circumcision over having merited to bring him into the covenant.

The first beracha focuses on the physical act of circumcision, while the second extends to the broader covenantal themes that circumcision represents.

A passage in Devarim spells out clearly that God’s covenant is with the entire Jewish people, including women:

דברים כט: ט–יא

אַתֶּם נִצָּבִים הַיּוֹם כֻּלְּכֶם לִפְנֵי ה’ אֱלֹקֵיכֶם רָאשֵׁיכֶם שִׁבְטֵיכֶם זִקְנֵיכֶם וְשֹׁטְרֵיכֶם כֹּל אִישׁ יִשְׂרָאֵל: טַפְּכֶם נְשֵׁיכֶם וְגֵרְךָ אֲשֶׁר בְּקֶרֶב מַחֲנֶיךָ מֵחֹטֵב עֵצֶיךָ עַד שֹׁאֵב מֵימֶיךָ: לְעָבְרְךָ בִּבְרִית ה’ אֱלֹקֶיךָ וּבְאָלָתוֹ אֲשֶׁר ה’ אֱלֹקֶיךָ כֹּרֵת עִמְּךָ הַיּוֹם:

Devarim 29:9–11

You stand today all of you before the Lord your God, the heads of your tribes, your elders, and your officers and every man of Israel. Your children, your women, and the convert who is within your camp, from the chopper of your wood to the drawer of your water. To bring you into the covenant of the Lord your God and into His oath, which the Lord your God hews with you today.

In the following chapter, the Torah introduces a metaphorical circumcision that transcends the physical, removing barriers in the heart and soul that impede love of God:

דברים ל:ו

וּמָ֨ל ה’ אֱלֹקיךָ אֶת־לְבָבְךָ֖ וְאֶת־לְבַ֣ב זַרְעֶ֑ךָ לְאַהֲבָ֞ה אֶת־ה’ אֱלֹקיךָ בְּכָל־לְבָבְךָ֥ וּבְכָל־ נַפְשְׁךָ֖ לְמַ֥עַן חַיֶּֽיךָ:

Devarim 30:6

And the Lord your God will circumcise your hearts and the hearts of your descendants to love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul for the sake of your life.

This idea would seem to apply equally to women and men.

Perhaps a third beracha recited at the mila, which opens by praising God “asher kidash yedid mi-beten”, “Who has sanctified the beloved one from the womb,” is a nod to the significance of the mother in eligibility for the covenant from the time of Avraham and Sara.

רש”י שבת קלז:

אשר קידש ידיד מבטן – יצחק קרי ידיד, על שם אשר אהבת (בראשית כב).מבטן – דקודם שנולד נתקדש למצוה זו, דכתיב (בראשית יז) אבל שרה אשתך [יֹלֶדֶת לְךָ בֵּן וְקָרָאתָ אֶת שְׁמוֹ יִצְחָק ]וגו’ והקימותי את בריתי אתו היינו מילה.

Rashi, Shabbat 137b

Who has sanctified the beloved one…Yitzchak is called beloved one, after “whom you have loved” (Bereishit 22). From the womb – For before he was born he was consecrated for this mitzva, as is written, “But Sara your wife [will bear you a son and you will call his name Yitzchak], and I will establish my covenant with him”—that is mila.

Indeed, our sages maintained that Avraham’s children through Ketura were circumcised, as was Yishmael. But it is only for those descended from Sara that mila represents full inclusion in God’s covenant with the Avot.

Ramban argues that Jewish matrilineage begins at the time of Avraham and Sara.¹⁷ Solely by virtue of being born to a Jewish woman, male offspring become obligated in berit mila, regardless of the father’s religious identity:

רמב”ן ויקרא כד: י

… וק”ו [=וקל וחומר] הדבר, אם לאחר מתן תורה שהכותי הבא על בת אברהם מחייבי לאוין ואין לו בה קידושין היא מקוה טהורה לאומות להכשיר את ולדה להיות כמוה, לא כל שכן קודם התורה שתהא מטהרת ולדה להיות כמוה לחייבו במילה כזרעו של אברהם ויהיה מכלל בני ישראל:

Ramban, Vayikra 24:10

…The matter is an argument a fortiori: If after the giving of the Torah, when a non-Jew has relations with a daughter of Avraham, they are liable for violating prohibitions and kiddushin between them would not be valid, [yet] she is a purifying mikveh for the nations to render her child fit to be like her; how much more so before the Torah was given that she purify her child to be like her to obligate him in mila as the seed of Avraham that he [the offspring] will be among the children of Israel.

Ramban here draws a rough analogy to conversion. A child with a non-Jewish father is brought into the covenant first by their mother’s womb acting as a metaphorical mikveh for them, after which a male child undergoes circumcision.

For Ramban, a Jewish woman is more than a passive part of the overarching covenant with our forefathers. Through matrilineage, it is she who makes a child subject to the covenant, including its physical expression in circumcision for a male child.

Of course a Jewish mother is an essential part of Jewish continuity. What Ramban puts into words is a direct link between her and the covenantal act of circumcision, and thus the covenant with our forebears, because liability formila begins with her.

Female Mohalot in Practice

We saw above that Rav Hai Gaon ruled in accordance with Rabbi Yochanan, that a woman can perform a valid mila. Ra’aviyah rules this way as well, though he thinks it preferable to defer to a male with special expertise, in order to satisfy all opinions:

ראבי”ה חלק א – שבת רעט

אבל איתתא כשירה למימהל דהילכתא כרבי יוחנן, ולא כדאמר רב פפא. וכן פסקו רברבתא. ומיהו אי איכא גברא רופא מהדרינן עליה, לאפוקי נפשיה מפלוגתא. ומלשון כשירה אין להוכיח דבדיעבד קאמר רבי יוחנן…:

Ra’aviyah I, Shabbat 279

But a woman is fit to perform circumcision, for the halacha is like Rabbi Yochanan, and not as Rav Papa said. And so ruled the rabbis. And nevertheless, if there is a male doctor we make an effort to get him, to keep oneself away from controversy. And from the language of “she is fit” one cannot establish that Rabbi Yochanan meant bediavad [only after the fact]…

The implication seems to be that women of his time and place routinely performed circumcisions, and were more readily available to do so than men.¹⁸

Rif rules like Rabbi Yochanan as well but writes clearly that this fundamentally only applies in cases in which no qualified man is available to perform the mila:

רי”ף שבת נו.

הלכך היכא דליכא גברא יהודאה דידע למימהל ואיכא איתתא יהודיתא דידעה למימהל ומהלא שפיר דמי דהלכה כרבי יוחנן דקיימא לן רב ורבי יוחנן הלכה כרבי יוחנן:

Rif Shabbat 56a

Therefore, where there is no Jewish man who knows how to circumcise, and there is a Jewish woman who knows how to circumcise and circumcises, it is fitting, for halacha is in accordance with Rabbi Yochanan, for we maintain that [in disputes between] Rav and Rabbi Yochanan, halacha is like Rabbi Yochanan.

Rambam follows suit.¹⁹ Tosafot, on the other hand, maintain that a woman is unfit to perform a mila, because in a baraita that appears earlier in the Talmud, Rabbi Yehuda Ha-nassi quoted Rav’s verse, indicating that mila should not be performed by a woman, and not Rabbi Yochanan’s, indicating that it can be:

תוספות עבודה זרה כז.

אשה לאו בת מילה היא – יש לפסוק כרב ואין אשה כשרה למול דאף על גב דרב ורבי יוחנן הלכה כרבי יוחנן בהא הלכה כרב דברייתא דרבי יהודה הנשיא קיימא כוותיה.

Tosafot, Avoda Zara 27a

A woman is not subject to mila – One should rule like Rav, and a woman is not fit to perform circumcision, for even though [in disputes between] Rav and Rabbi Yochanan, halacha is like Rabbi Yochanan, in this the halacha is like Rav, for a baraita of Rabbi Yehuda Ha-nassi [in a different case] maintains like him.

Shulchan Aruch rules like Rif and Rambam,²⁰ and Rema adds that, in deference to those who rule against a woman performing mila, we make an effort to find a male mohel when none is readily available:²¹

רמ”א יו”ד רסד: א

וי”א [=ויש אומרים] דאשה לא תמול (סמ”ק והגהות מרדכי), וכן נוהגין להדר אחר איש.

Rema YD 264:1

There are those who say that a woman should not perform circumcision, and so our practice is to seek out a man.

This is accepted practice.

Other Roles

A central role in the mila is that of the sandak, who holds the baby during the circumcision. This is considered a great honor. A midrash lists being sandak among ways of serving God with one’s body.²²

מדרש תהלים לה:ב

כל עצמותי תאמרנה ה’ מי כמוך, אמר לו הקדוש ברוך הוא דוד מה אתה עושה לי, אמר לו אני אשבחך בכל אבריי, …בברכיי אני נעשה סינדיקנוס לילדים הנימולים על ברכיי…

Midrash Tehillim 35:2

“All my bones shall say: God, who is like you?” God said to David: what do you do for me? He said: I will praise you with all my limbs…with my knees I become a sandak [syndiknos] for boys who are circumcised on my lap.

Maharil adds that a sandak is considered akin to an altar upon which the mila is offered. He thus fulfills a greater mitzva even than the mohel:

ספר מהרי”ל (מנהגים) הלכות מילה א

מהר”י סג”ל כשנעשה הוא בעל ברית והוא קרוי סנדיק ]סנדק[ בלשון חכמים, היה נוהג לרחוץ ולטבול עצמו להכניס התינוק בטהרה לברית. ואמר גדול מצות בעל הברית ממצות המוהל, מפני שרגליו נדמו למזבח כאילו מקטיר קטרת לשמים.

Maharil, Minhagim, Laws of Mila 1

Maharil, when he was made a ba’al berit, and that is what is called sandak in the language of the sages, was accustomed to wash and to immerse himself in order to bring the baby into the covenant in purity. And he said: The mitzva of the ba’al ha-berit is greater than the mitzva of the mohel, because his legs are compared to an altar as if he brings an incense offering to Heaven.

Maharil refers to the sandak as ba’al berit, the master or host of the berit mila ceremony. Although the two roles are not always identical, they often overlap.

Some early halachic sources refer to a woman at a mila as ba’al(at) ha-berit, implying that a woman could serve as a sandakit. Indeed, based on sources from late medieval Ashkenaz, it seems that women would often fill this role. For example, in this question to a local authority (recorded in the fourteenth century), the baby’s two grandmothers are arguing over who will serve as sandakit:

תשובות ופסקים לחכמי אשכנז וצרפת סימן ע”א קובץ שיטות קמאי, קידושין כט.

מעשה באחד שנולד לו בן וצותה לו אמו לעשותה בעל ברית, וחמותו אמרה אני אזכה.

Responsa and Rulings from sages of Ashkenaz and France, 71, Kovetz Shitot Kamai, Kiddushin 29a

A case of one who had a son born to him, and his mother ordered him to make her the ba’al berit, and his mother-in-law said, I should merit it.

It is apparent from this question that the honor was perceived as very great, and as being firmly in the province of women. This practice was apparently widespread, as we learn from a responsum in which Rav Shimshon ben Tzadok (Tashbetz), a student of Maharam’s, describes Maharam’s vociferous objection to it.

ספר תשב”ץ קטן סימן שצז

אינו נראה לי כלל מנהג כשר שנוהגין ברוב מקומות שהאשה יושבת בבית הכנסת עם האנשים ומלין התינוק בחיקה ואפילו אם בעלה מוהל או אביה או בנה דלאו אורחא ליכנס אשה מקושטת בין האנשים ובפני השכינה….ועוד דאפילו בעיקר מילה לא נצטווית למול אפי[לו] בנה דכתיב אשר צוה אותו אותו ולא אותה ואם כן למה לי כולי האי שימולו לתוך חיקה ולחטוף מאנשים המצוה. ומי שיש בידו למחות ימחה והמחמיר תבא עליו ברכה ושלום. מאיר ב”ר ברוך זלה”ה: באשר כתב מורנו צעקתי ימים רבים ולית דמשגח. כי נראה מכוער מאד. אף על גב דטרידי בעבידתייהו ולא מהרהרי. הרואים חושדים ואפי[לו] אדם עם אשתו. ועוד אין כל אדם יודע שהיא אשתו. ועוד וכי בחנם היתה עזרת נשים לבד…

Tashbetz Katan 397

It does not seem to me at all a fitting custom that we are accustomed in most places, for a woman to sit in the synagogue with the men and they circumcise the baby on her lap, and even if her husband is the mohel, or her father or her son, for it is not proper to bring a well-dressed woman among the men and before the divine presence.….And further that even in the fundamental mitzva of mila she was not commanded to circumcise even her son, for it is written, “that God commanded him, him and not her.” And if so, why do I need all of this that they circumcise him within her lap and she snatch away the mitzva from men. And someone who has the capability to protest, should protest, and may blessing and peace come upon one who is stringent. Meir son of Baruch [Maharam]. Given what our master wrote, I complained for many days, but no one heeds. For it seems very inappropriate, and even though they are busy with their service and do not come to inappropriate thoughts, those who see will suspect, and even a man and his wife. And furthermore, not everyone knows it is his wife. And furthermore, was the women’s section made separate for nought?…

Maharam’s main objections center on tzeniut concerns in having a well-dressed woman among the men in the main sanctuary of the synagogue, especially taking into consideration the necessary physical proximity of the mohel to the sandak. While Tashbetz acknowledges that a woman’s presence will not necessarily lead to sin, as when the mohel and sandakit are married, he expresses concern for the very appearance of impropriety. (The possibility that the mohel and sandakit could be married or first-degree relatives suggests that, if the baby’s father personally performed the mila, the baby’s mother or paternal grandmother might act as sandakit.)

Given Tashbetz’s emphasis on the synagogue, and the importance of the established women’s section there, it is possible that such a concern would not be in full force for a berit mila performed in a more private space, whether a rented hall or a family home, where perhaps a woman could serve as sandakit without the same level of concern.²³

However, Maharam raises an additional concern. Following the position that a woman lacks any obligation in berit mila, he sees her serving in this role as taking a mitzva away from male prerogative.

In trying to understand this argument, Professor Elisheva Baumgarten’s historical work proves helpful. In her discussion of this responsum and of the role of the ba’alat berit within it, Professor Baumgarten unpacks gender-based tensions surrounding women being honored with the role of sandak:

Dr. Elisheva Baumgarten, Mothers and Children: Jewish Family Life in Medieval Europe (Princeton University Press, 2013), 47–75

His [Tashbetz’s] language is especially sharp, in that he advises anyone who fears the Lord to leave the sanctuary. These statements suggest that the change was not readily accepted, perhaps especially by women. After all, birth was an exceptional arena dominated by women; perhaps some of them saw circumcision as an extension of their responsibilities toward the child. In light of these sources and our discussion of the role of the male ba’al brit, I would suggest that the role of the ba’alei brit became widespread in Ashkenaz during the tenth and eleventh centuries. The task was allotted to men or women and was called by the general term ba’al brit, regardless of the gender of the person who held the baby…. during this period of the baby’s life he was in the sole care of women. Women took care of him from birth to the circumcision ceremony and they resumed caring for him immediately after the circumcision ritual. R. Meir of Rothenburg and others wanted participants to be male, perhaps in order to emphasize the male character of the ritual

That is to say, mila can be thought of as a liminal moment anticipating a male baby’s eventual transition from a maternal-dominated world to the communal and ritual realm of Jewish men. Since the gateway ritual is literally taking on the physical mark of Jewish manhood—the lack of a foreskin— as the baby joins the covenant, the underlying tension that animated Maharam may have rested in whether the transition into manhood is also a transition away from the world of women.

As striking as the rabbis’ objections are, equally notable is the community’s initial resistance to them, perhaps because of how natural it would have seemed for a maternal figure to hold and soothe a baby during mila and possibly because of women’s seeing themselves as deeply invested and engaged in the ceremony and covenant.

Rabbi Professor Daniel Sperber suggests that a woman’s proximity to the baby at the berit might have facilitated another significant aspect of the mother’s participation in a berit mila, attested in early sources: partaking of the wine.

A beracha is recited over wine at a berit, even though this is not stipulated by the Talmud. Then, as now, the baby received a finger dipped in wine to suck on and soothe himself. What is less widely known is that the mother was also given wine from the “cup of blessing” to drink, for the sake of her own healing.

סדר רב עמרם גאון, סדר מילה

ומשגרין את הכוס לאמו של תינוק. ולמה לאמו של תינוק, שנאמר עליו שירה, ובקשו הצבור רחמים על התינוק ועל אמו…ואמו חולה היא וצריכה לרחמים ולרפואה, לכך שותה אותו אמו של תינוק.

Seder (Siddur) Rav Amram Gaon, Mila

And we send the cup to the mother of the baby. And why to the mother of the baby? For songs of praise were recited over it [the cup], and the community requested mercy for the baby and for the mother…and his mother is a chola (ill) and needs mercy and healing; therefore, the mother of the baby drinks it.

In our piece on childbirth, we learned about the priority that Halacha places on both mother and baby’s health and healing. In addition to his discussion of the wine, Rav Amram presents parallel prayers said for the health of both of them. Here is the prayer for the mother’s health:

סדר רב עמרם גאון סדר מילה

תשתלח אסותא דחיי ודרחמי מן קדם מימרא דשמיא לאסאה לאמיה דרביא הדין, דהיא צריכה אסו. ותתסי כמא דאיתסיאו מי מרה ע”י [=על ידי] משה וכמיא דיריחו על ידי אלישע, כן תתסי בעגלא ובזמן קריב, ואמרו אמן.

Seder (Siddur) Rav Amram Gaon, Mila

May healing be sent for life and mercy from before the Word of Heaven to heal the mother of this baby, for she needs healing. And heal as the waters of Mara were healed by Moshe and as the waters of Yericho were healed by Elisha, so may she be healed speedily and soon.

Rav Sperber argues that this practice may have fallen out of favor as it became more difficult logistically. Once it became less well-received for a woman to serve as sandakit, women were less likely to be in close proximity to the baby during mila.

הרב פרופסור דניאל שפרבר, מנהגי ישראל, כרך א, פרק ד מוסד הרב קוק 1990, עמ’ סה-סו

נמצאנו למדים, שהמנהג הקדום עד ימי המהר”ם מרוטנברג היה, שהאישה היתה כשרה להיות בעלת ברית או סנדק, ומן הסתם היתה גם אם התינוק בבית-הכנסת והיתה שומעת הברכה [על היין]…ומתוך כך אנו מבינים את המנהג הקדום שהיו משקים את התינוק ואת אם התינוק. ואולם על יסוד פסיקתו של המהר”ם מרוטנברג….נתבטל גם המנהג הקדום להשקות את אם התינוק מן היין של ברכה…

Rabbi Daniel Sperber, Minhagei Yisrael I, chapter 4 (Mossad Ha-Rav Kook, 1990), 65-66.

We have seen that the early custom until the days of Maharam of Rothenberg was that a woman was fit to be ba’alat ha-berit, or sandak, and presumably the mother of the child was also in the synagogue and would hear the beracha [over the wine]…and from this we understand the early custom that they would give the baby and the baby’s mother to drink. However, on the basis of Maharam’s ruling…the old custom, of giving the baby’s mother to drink from the wine of blessing, was also nullified.

About a century after Maharam, Maharil reports concerns about gender mixing at the berit during the process of transferring the baby from the women’s area to the men’s. Here, the term ba’alat berit refers to the role usually known as kvatterin, the woman who brings the baby from his mother to the threshold of the space where the mila will take place.

ספר מהרי”ל (מנהגים) הלכות מילה כב

אמר מהר”י סג”ל דכתב מהר”ם האשה שהיא בעלת ברית ליטול הילד מהיולדת להוליכו לב”ה [=לבית הכנסת] להמול תוליכנו עד פתח ב”ה [=בית הכנסת]. ולא תכנס אל תוכו להיות ג”כ [=גם כן] סנדיק לשם להמול הילד על ברכיה משום פריצות שתלך אשה בין אנשים. ואמר דיש אנשים כשנעשו סנדיקין ואין נשותיהן עמהם, הולכים בעצמם ומביאין הילד מן היולדת. אך הוא נזהר בכך, דפעם אחת הוא נעשה סנדיק ולא היתה אשתו עמו, וצוה להביא אליו הילד לב”ה [=לבית הכנסת]. כי הנכנס אצל היולדת להביאו, דרך הנשים לתפוש בכנף הנושא כשמוליכו למצוה. ואמר מסתמא מדהקפיד מהר”ם שלא תכנס האשה בעזרה בין האנשים, מסתמא ג”כ [=גם כן] לא יכנס איש בין הנשים…

Maharil Minhagim, Mila 22

Maharil said that Maharam wrote that the woman who is ba’alat berit, to take the child from the woman who gave birth and bring him to the synagogue to be circumcised, should bring him until the doorway of the synagogue. And she should not come inside to also be sandak for the child to be circumcised on her lap, out of concern for immodesty that a woman should go among men. And he said that there are men who when they are made sandak and their wives aren’t with them, they go themselves and bring the child from the woman who gave birth. But he himself was careful regarding this, for once he was made sandak and his wife was not with him, and he commanded to bring the child to him in the synagogue. For one who enters the place of the woman who gave birth to bring him, it is the way of the women to grab the edge of his clothing when he brings him to the mitzva. And he said presumably since Maharam was careful that a woman not enter the men’s section among the men, also a man should not enter among the women…

As with the discussion of a woman as sandak, the emphasis is on modesty constraints.²⁴ These concerns about gender mixing appear not just in the context of women entering the hallowed men’s section of the synagogue, but also with respect to a man collecting a baby from among the women.

We discuss varying approaches to mingling and gender separation in different communal spaces here. In communities that typically follow more lenient approaches to gender mixing, there is room to question the applicability of rulings that limit women’s roles at a berit based on this concern.

Ultimately, Rema accepts Maharam’s ruling against a woman acting as sandakit. This ruling is widely followed, even in communities where gender mixing is more accepted.

רמ”א יו”ד רסה:יא

ואין לאשה להיות סנדק לתינוק במקום שאפשר באיש, משום דהוי כפריצות. ומ”מ [=ומכל מקום] היא עוזרת לבעלה ומביאה התינוק עד בית הכנסת, ואז לוקח האיש ממנה ונעשה סנדק (שם בשם מוהר”ם).

Rema YD 265:11

A woman should not be sandak for a baby in a place where a man is a possibility, because it is akin to impropriety. But in any case, she helps her husband and brings the baby until the synagogue, and then the man takes from her and becomes sandak (in the name of Maharam).

Rema does not rule out the mother drinking from the cup or sharing in a prayer for her well-being. Both of these can be incorporated into the mila ceremony without halachic hesitation, creating an additional level of ritual connection and recognition for the baby’s mother. As we discuss here, the mother may choose to recite birkat ha-gomel on this occasion as well.

Kvatter and Nidda

In common practice nowadays, married couples are selected for the role of kvatter and kvatterin, since they provide a natural way to transfer modestly from a woman to a man. This is also seen as an honor with potential spiritual benefits for a couple that wishes to have children.

Both because it is considered an honor and out of regard for privacy, couples usually accept this role even when the woman is in nidda, although passing directly between a couple is prohibited at such times. (Learn more about passing a baby in our discussion of Postpartum, here.)

In his practical guide to the laws of nidda, Rav Mordechai Eliyahu notes that the custom in Chevron is to permit passing in this instance, though he considers it preferable to bring in the baby atop two layers, like two pillows, so that the husband merely lifts off the top layer.:

הרב מרדכי אליהו, דרכי טהרה, עמ’ 43

…היה ראוי לאסור להעביר תינוק בברית מילה מאשה נדה לבעלה, אך יש קולות שונות בכך, בגלל שיש רבים בזמן המילה, ואין לחשוש להרהור וכד’. בעיה”ק [=בעיר הקודש] חברון נהגו להעבירו מיד ליד ובזהירות מרובה ביותר שלא ליגע אחד בשני, ומי שנמנע מכך “קדוש אמר לו”. ויש שנהגו להניח התינוק על שני כרים ותאחז האשה בתחתון, ויאחז הבעל בעליון ויקחנו עם הילד, ועדיף הוא על העברה מיד ליד.

Rav Mordechai Eliyahu, Darchei Tahara, 43

…It would be fitting to prohibit passing a baby at a berit mila from a woman in nidda to her husband, but there are various leniencies with this, since there are many people there at the time of the mila, and one need not be concerned for inappropriate thoughts, etc. In the holy city of Chevron they were accustomed to pass him from hand to hand with extreme caution not to touch each other, and regarding one who avoids that, “holiness will be said of him.” And there are those who had the practice to place the baby on two pillows and the woman would hold the lower one, and the husband would hold the upper one and take it with the boy, and this is preferable to passing from hand to hand.

Recitations

The Talmud teaches that the baby’s father and the mohel recite the core berachot on the mila and entering the covenant. This makes sense because the primary obligation of mila is incumbent on the father, and the mohel is the one who actually performs the mitzva. (A father who is qualified performs the mila himself.)

שבת קלז:

תנו רבנן המל אומר אשר קדשנו במצותיו וצונו על המילה אבי הבן אומר אשר קדשנו במצותיו וצונו להכניסו בבריתו של אברהם אבינו העומדים אומרים כשם שנכנס לברית כך יכנס לתורה לחופה ולמעשים טובים והמברך אומר אשר קידש ידיד מבטן חוק בשארו שם וצאצאיו חתם באות ברית קדש על כן בשכר זאת א-ל חי חלקנו צוה להציל ידידות שארינו משחת למען בריתו אשר שם בבשרנו ברוך אתה ה’ כורת הברית

Shabbat 137b

Our rabbis taught [in a baraita]: The one who circumcises says, “Who has sanctified us with His commandments and commanded us in mila.” The boy’s father says, “Who has sanctified us with His commandments and commanded us to bring him into the covenant of Avraham Avinu.” Those standing [there] say, “Just as he has entered the covenant, so may he enter Torah and chuppa and good deeds.” And the one who blesses says, “Who sanctified the beloved one from the womb and placed law in his flesh and sealed his descendants with the sign of the sacred covenant. Therefore, in reward for this, Living God, our Portion, commanded saving the beloved of our flesh from destruction for the sake of His covenant that He placed in our flesh. Blessed are You, God, Hewer of the covenant.”

The beracha over the wine is recited after the cutting is complete in conjunction with the beracha of thanks and praise for circumcision and its role in our deliverance—“asher kidash yedid mi-beten” “Who sanctified the beloved one [Yitzchak] from the womb.” (See above “Hashkafa Question” for a discussion of how this phrase highlights a woman’s connection to berit mila.)

The Talmud does not stipulate who should recite this beracha, calling this person simply “ha-mevarech,” the one who recites the beracha.²⁵ Indeed, Rambam maintains that one of those present at the berit can recite this beracha.

רמב”ם הלכות מילה ג:ג

ואחר כך מברך אבי הבן או המל או אחד מן העומדין שם, ברוך אתה יי’ אלקינו מלך העולם אשר קידש ידיד מבטן.

Rambam, Laws of Mila 3:3

Afterwards the boy’s father or the mohel or one of those standing there recites the beracha, “Blessed are You, Lord our God, King of the Universe, Who sanctified the beloved one from the womb…”

Shulchan Aruch rules accordingly:

שולחן ערוך יו”ד רסה:א

המל, מברך: אשר קדשנו במצותיו וצונו על המילה; ואבי הבן מברך…אשר קדשנו במצותיו וצונו להכניסו בבריתו של אברהם אבינו….ואם אחרים עומדים שם, אומרים: כשם שהכנסתו לברית כן תכניסהו לתורה ולחופה ולמעשים טובים. ואבי הבן או המוהל או אחד מהעם מברך על הכוס: בורא פרי הגפן. ויש נוהגים ליטול הדס בידו, ומברך עליו, ולהריח, ואומר: בא”י אלקינו מלך העולם אשר קדש ידיד מבטן וכו’…

Shulchan Aruch YD 265:1

The mohel recites the beracha: “Who has sanctified us with His commandments and commanded us in mila.” The boy’s father recites the beracha, “Who has sanctified us with His commandments and commanded us to bring him into the covenant of Avraham Avinu”….And if others are standing there, they say: “Just as he entered the covenant, so may he enter Torah and chuppa and good deeds.” And the boy’s father or the mohel or one of the people recites the beracha over the cup: “Who creates the fruit of the vine.” And some have the custom that he takes a myrtle branch in his hand, and recites a beracha over it, and smells it, and says: “Blessed are you, Lord our God, Who sanctified the beloved one from the womb…”

“Asher kidash yedid mi-beten” moves from highlighting the sanctity from the womb to emphasizing the sealing the covenant in the flesh, phrasing that is reminiscent of a line in birkat ha-mazon that women may say, but are not required to recite. (Learn more here.)

This beracha is customarily followed by the naming of the infant, though this was not an original part of the mila ceremony. The naming is embedded in a prayer that the boy should live to cause his parents rejoicing, often—though not always—recited by whoever is honored with reciting “asher kidash.”

Later on, birkat ha-mazon at the end of the festive meal in celebration of the berit opens with a special zimmun that (in the presence of a minyan) includes God’s name. Birkat ha-mazon concludes with a series of prayers for the parents, mohel, sandak, and infant and yearning for Mashi’ach and the return of Eliyahu, all beginning with the word “Ha-Rachaman,” “[May] the Merciful One.”

In a response to a query by Deracheha, Rav Baruch Gigi, Rosh Yeshiva of Yeshivat Har Etzion, lays out which of these blessings and prayers a woman might say:

תשובת הרב ברוך גיגי למערכת דרכיה, 24.8.26

ברכת אשר קדש ידיד מבטן היא ברכת השבח, ולכאורה איני רואה מניעה שאישה תברך אותה, ואף אם היינו דורשים עשרה [מה שכנראה לא מעכב בודאי], זהו רק לפרסומי מילתא, ואין מניעה הלכתית שאישה תברך. גם כאן הדבר אינו נהוג, ורצוי לנהוג בשיקול דעת. לתת את השם, בודאי שאין בעיה, ואפשר לתת לאשה. ולעניין הרחמנים בברכת המזון, מדובר בתוספת איחולים ותפילות לרך הנולד, ואפשר לכבד את מי שרוצים, בלא מגבלה

Response of Rav Baruch Gigi to Deracheha, 8.24.26

The blessing of “Asher kidash yedid mi-beten” is a beracha of praise, and prima facie I don’t see anything preventing a woman from reciting it, and even if we were to require a quorum of ten for it [which it seems is not a necessity for certain], this is only to publicize the matter, and there is no halachic barrier to a woman reciting the beracha. Here as well, this is not customary, and it is desirable to exercise judgement. To give the name, certainly there is no difficulty and it is possible to give [this honor] to a woman. And regarding the matter of the ha-Rachaman [prayers] in birkat ha-mazon, we are speaking of additional wishes and prayers for the newborn and it is possible to honor whoever they wish, without a limit.

While, out of respect for communal custom, Rav Gigi would not have a woman recite the beracha of “asher kidash,” he would permit a woman to name the baby. This could potentially be done from the women’s section. Though a woman would not lead the zimmun for the minyan present (learn more here), Rav Gigi maintains that she could recite a ha-Rachaman at the conclusion of birkat ha-mazon.

The history of women serving as sandakiot at the berit, and of mothers drinking the wine and receiving a dedicated prayer, all speak to more ritual involvement of the mothers (and grandmothers) at a berit. In practice, women can still be heavily involved in the ritual components of the berit. A woman serves as kvatterin; the mother may drink the wine, receive prayers, and recite ha-gomel, all possible from the women’s section; and, following Rav Gigi’s ruling in communities where this would be welcome, women may name the baby or recite some of the ha-Rachaman prayers at the end of birkat ha-mazon.

Regardless of whether women take an active ritual part in the berit beyond kvatterin, women are very much present at a berit mila. The mother’s spirit hovers over the child, and her participation in the berit represents her own covenantal experience and commitments.

Notes

1. The other two are procreation and the prohibition of eating the sciatic nerve and its surrounding tissues.

ספר החינוך סדר ומניין המצוות

כל המצוות שנתן הא-ל ברוך הוא לעמו ישראל הכלולות בספר התורה שהן קבועות לדורות, בין מצוות עשה ולא תעשה, הם תרי”ג מצוות…וכסדר הזה שאני כותבן זו אחר זו הן כתובות בספר התורה. בראשית א מצות פריה ורביה ,לך לך ב מצות מילה, וישלח ג שלא לאכול גיד הנשה.

Sefer Ha-chinuch, Order and Counting of the Mitzvot

All the mitzvot that God gave to his people Israel that are included in the Torah that are established for generations, whether positive or negative mitzvot, they are 613 mitzvot…And according to the order that I write them, one after another, they are written in the Torah. Bereishit (1) the mitzva of procreation, Lech Lecha (2) the mitzva of circumcision, Vayishlach (3) not to eat the sciatic nerve.

2. The threshold acts for females joining the Jewish people are immersion and sacrifice. Today, in the absence of Beit Ha-Mikdash, neither men nor women offer sacrifices.

3. Available here.

4. See here.

5. Available here.

6. See these medical papers.

7. Available here.

8. See here, top right.

נשמת אברהם יו”ד רסא

ואמרו לי הגרש”ז [=הגאון רב שלמה זלמן] אויערבך זצ”ל והגרי”ש [=והגאון רב יוסף שלום] אלישיב שליט”א שאם לא יהיה שום סכנה בשימוש במשחה, יהיה מותר וגם חיוב להשתמש בה. ובזמן כתיבת המהדורא הזאת שמעתי בשם הגרי”ש [=והגאון רב יוסף שלום] אלישיב שליט”א שאין להשתמש במשחת הרדמה בתינוק. וכששאלתי את הגאון שליט”א אם הוא חזר בו ממה שאמר לי אז “שיהיה מותר וגם חיוב להשתמש במשחה”, ענה לי: אם התינוק קצת חלש מותר להרדים.

Nishmat Avraham YD 261

Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach, of blessed memory, and Rav Yosef Shalom Elyashiv, may he live long, said to me that if there is no danger in using the cream, it is permissible and even obligatory to use it. And when writing this edition, I heard in the name of Rav Yosef Shalom Elyashiv that one should not use anesthetic cream for the baby. And when I asked the great Rav if he had changed his mind from what he said to me then, “it is permissible and even obligatory to use the cream,” he answered me: If the baby is a little bit weak, it is permissible to use anesthetic.

9. Hebrew abstract here.

10. Available here.

11.

מגילה כ.

משנה…ולא מלין…עד שתנץ החמה…. גמרא …דכתיב וביום השמיני ימול…

Megilla 20a

Mishna:…And we don’t perform circumcision…until the sun rises…Gemara: As it is written, “On the eighth day he will be circumcised.”

12. Being on the eighth day is not sufficient to make it time-bound, since the obligation remains in place after the eighth day.

תוספות קידושין כט. ד”ה אותו ולא אותה

וי”ל [=ויש לומר] כיון דמיום השמיני והלאה אין לה הפסק לאו זמן גרמא הוא

Tosafot, Kiddushin 29a, s.v. oto ve-lo ota

One can say that since from the eighth day on there is no break [in the obligation], it is not time-bound.

13.

הלכות מילה א:א

ומצוה על האב למול את בנו

Rambam, Laws of Mila 1:1

It is a mitzva incumbent on the father to circumcise his son

14. Even if this refers to their first son, Tzipora would have been familiar with circumcision, as a descendant of Midyan and thus of Avraham (through Ketura).

בראשית כה: א–ב

וַיֹּסֶף אַבְרָהָם וַיִּקַּח אִשָּׁה וּשְׁמָהּ קְטוּרָה: וַתֵּלֶד לוֹ אֶת זִמְרָן וְאֶת יָקְשָׁן וְאֶת מְדָן וְאֶת מִדְיָן וְאֶת יִשְׁבָּק וְאֶת שׁוּחַ:

Bereishit 25:1–2

And Avraham took another wife, and her name was Ketura. And she bore him Zimran and Yokshan and Medan and Midyan and Yishbak and Shuach.

רמב”ם הלכות מלכים י:ח

אמרו חכמים שבני קטורה שהם זרעו של אברהם שבא אחר ישמעאל ויצחק חייבין במילה.

Rambam, Laws of Kings 10:8

The Sages said that the children of Ketura, who are descendants of Avraham who came after Yishmael and Yitzchak, are obligated in mila.

15. Two other possible precedents that might also be reread like the Tzipora narrative are II Macabees 6:10 and Tosefta Shabbat 15:8. The latter uses the female verb form “mala,” she circumcised.

16.

ספר שבלי הלקט הלכות מילה סימן ג

למאן דאמר המול ימול, כיון דלישראל איפקוד איתתא כמאן דמהילא דמיא דהא אפי[לו] ערלי ישראל כמאן דמהילי דמי, דתנן: קונם שאיני נהנה לערלים מותר בערלי ישראל ואסור במולי אומות העולם. הלכך אשה מהלא במקום דליכא גברא דידע למימהל דקיי”ל [=דקיימא לן] כר’ יוחנן.

Sefer Shibolei Ha-leket, Mila 3

According to the one who says, “he shall surely be circumcised,” since Israel is commanded, a woman is like one who is circumcised. For even the uncircumcised of Israel are like those who are circumcised, as it is taught: “[One who says] konam [I take a vow] that I will not derive benefit from the uncircumcised, he is permitted [to derive benefit from] the uncircumcised of Israel, and prohibited [to derive benefit from] the circumcised of the nations of the world.” Therefore, a woman may circumcise in a place where there is no man who knows how to circumcise, since we rule in accordance with Rabbi Yochanan.

17. Thank you to Rabbi Dr. Judah Goldberg for suggesting this source. His series on Berit Avot and Berit Sinai can be found here.

18. This seems to have been the common state of affairs in the Ethiopian Jewish community until modern times. The baby was left in its mother’s charge, women cared for her, and women typically performed mila. See here.

19.

רמב”ם הלכות מילה ב: א

הכל כשרין למול ואפילו ערל ועבד ואשה וקטן מלין במקום שאין שם איש, אבל עכו”ם לא ימול כלל.

Rambam, Mila 2:1

All are fit to circumcise, even an uncircumcised [Jewish] man or a slave or a woman or a minor can circumcise in a place where there is no [circumcised] man, but a non-Jew may not circumcise at all.

20.

שולחן ערוך יו”ד רסד:א

הכל כשרים למול; אפילו עבד אשה וקטן וערל ישראל שמתו אחיו מחמת מילה. ואם יש ישראל גדול שיודע למול, הוא קודם לכולם.

Shulchan Aruch YD 264:1

All are fit to circumcise, even a bondsman, a woman, a minor, or an uncircumcised Jew whose brothers died due to mila. And if there is an adult Jewish man who knows how to circumcise, he takes precedence over all of them.

21. Rav Yaakov Emden adds that if a male mohel will not arrive by the end of the eighth day, a woman performs the berit mila if she is available.

בירת מגדל עוז, בריכה עליונה, הנחל הרביעי, ג-ד

י”א [=יש אומרים] אשה לא תמול, היכא דאפשר להדורי בתר ישראל גדול מהדרינן ודאי, אע”ג [=אף על גב] דליתיה הכא…וה”מ [=והני מילי] דאתי ביומא דשמיני, דאי לאו הכי אע”ג [=אף על גב] דאתי לאחר זמן פשיטא ליה דשהוי מצוה לא משהינן בשביל ספק זה

Birat Migdal Oz, Bereicha Elyona, Ha-nachal Ha-revi’i, 3-4

Some say that a woman should not circumcise, where it is possible to seek out an adult Jewish man we certainly do so, even if he is not here…And this is if he can come on the eighth day, for otherwise, even if he can come later, it is straightforward that we do not delay the mitzva on account of this possibility.

22. The term used in the midrash is syndiknos, which may be derived from the Greek synteknos (foster relative, godfather) or syndikos (advocate). See Jastrow, Even Shoshan, and Logeion dictionaries.

23. In a communication with Deracheha, Rav Baruch Gigi noted that there was more room to permit a woman acting as sandak outside of the synagogue, but that a couple should generally follow accepted practice:

הרב ברוך גיגי, תשובה למערכת דרכיה 24.8.26

מצד הדין אשה יכולה להיות סנדק, אך למעשה נהגו שלא לכבד אשה בסנדקאות. אם מדובר בבית הכנסת, נכון להימנע מזה. אם מדובר במקום אחר, אני ממליץ גם כן להימנע, אבל אם זה קריטי לבני המשפחה, יש מקום לאפשר זאת, ובתנאי שהאשה לבושה בצניעות מוקפדת.

Rav Baruch Gigi, Response to Deracheha, 8.24.26

From a halachic perspective a woman can be sandak, but in practice they were accustomed not to honor a woman with being sandak. In the case of a synagogue, it is correct to refrain from this. In the case of a different location, I also recommend avoiding it, but if this is critical to the family members, there is room to allow it, on condition that the woman’s clothing is scrupulously modest.

24. By the seventeenth century, this limited role for women at a berit was widely accepted. In a discussion of the permissibility of father, sandak, and mohel wearing Shabbat clothes for a berit during the first nine days of Av, Magen Avraham mentions women’s dressing up for a berit as their key role in the performance of this mitzva. He does not specify whether the allowance for women to wear Shabbat clothes is restricted to the mother and kvatterin:

מגן אברהם או”ח תקנא ס”ק ג

ובעל ברית. לכאור[ה] דוקא אותו שתופס התינוק על ברכיו בשעת המילה כמ”ש [=כמו שכתוב] בי”ד סי’ רס”ה סי”א אבל המכניס ומוציא התינוק אינו בכלל זה ואף שהנשי[ם] רגילות ג”כ [=גם כן] ללבוש בגדי שבת היינו לפי שזה הוא עיקר מצותם

Magen Avraham, OC 551:3

And a ba’al berit. It would seem that specifically the one who holds the baby on his lap during the mila, as is written in YD 265:11, but the one who brings the baby in and out is not included in this [wearing Shabbat clothes in the nine days]. And although women are also accustomed to wear Shabbat clothing [to a berit], this is because this is the main aspect of their mitzva.

25. Ritva suggests that in Talmudic times, the mohel would not recite it because he would have been bloodied, but by Ritva’s era, it became customary for the mohel to recite it.

חדושי הריטב”א שבת קלז:

[משמע שאין המוהל מברך] אלא אחר מברך…אבל בזמן הזה אין נוהגין [כן], שאותו דם לאו מלוכלך הוא, אלא המל נוטל את ידיו ומברך.

Ritva Shabbat 137b

[It implies that the mohel does not recite the beracha,] but rather another recites the beracha…but now we do not practice this, for that blood is not dirty, but the circumciser washes his hands and recites the beracha.

Sources

Mila

בראשית יז: ז–יד

Bereishit 17:7–14

מכילתא דרבי ישמעאל בא – מסכתא דפסחא פרשה ה

Mechilta de-Rabbi Yishmael, Bo - Masechta De-Pischa 5

כריתות ט.

Keritot 9a

נדרים לא:

רבי ישמעאל אומר גדולה מילה שנכרתו עליה שלש עשרה בריתות

Nedarim 31b

Rabbi Yishmael says: Mila is great, for thirteen covenants were hewn over it.

ויקרא יב: ב–ד

Vayikra 12:2–4

מהר”ל תפארת ישראל ב

Maharal, Tiferet Yisrael 2

מדרש תנחומא, תזריע ז

Midrash Tanchuma, Tazria 7

Rabbi Avraham Steinberg, MD, “Anesthesia in Circumcision Medical and Halachic Consideration,” ASSIA: Jewish Medical Ethics VI, no. 1 (2007): 15–24

מדרש תנחומא וירא ו

Tanchuma, Veyera 6

ד”ר רננה רביצקי פילזר, “מילה של אמא”, מקור ראשון 14.3.19

Dr. Renana Ravitzky Pilzer, “A Mother’s Mila,” Makor Rishon, March 14, 2019

בית הבחירה למאירי, ברכות מח:

ונשים יש אומ[רים] שאין מזכירות ברית…ולדעתנו אף הנשים אומרות כן…שהרי בכלל ישראל הם ועל ישראל הן אומרות כך.

Beit Ha-bechira, Berachot 48b

קידושין כט.

Kiddushin 29a

תוספות רי”ד, קידושין כט., ד”ה איהי מנלן

Tosafot Rid, Kiddushin 29a, s.v. Ihi

חדושי הריטב”א, קידושין כט., ד”ה ואיהי מנא לן

Ritva, Kiddushin 29a, s.v. Ve-ihi mena lan

המקנה, קידושין כט.

Sefer Ha-makneh, Kiddushin 29a

שו”ת מהר”ח אור זרוע סימן יא

Responsa Maharach Or Zarua 11

שמות ד: כה

Shemot 4:25

And Tzipora took a flint and excised the foreskin of her son, and she touched it to his legs and said, for you are a bridegroom of blood for me.

עבודה זרה כז.

Avoda Zara 27a

עבודה זרה כז.

Avoda Zara 27a

רש”י עבודה זרה כז.

המול ימול – קרי ביה המל ימול מי שהוא מהול ימול אחרים.

Rashi ad loc

Himol yimol [he shall surely be circumcised]: Read it as hamal yimol [the one who circumcises shall be circumcised], one who is circumcised shall circumcise others.

שאילתות דרב אחאי, פרשת וירא, שאילתא י

Sheiltot of Rav Achai Gaon, Vayera 10

רש”ר הירש בראשית יז:י

Rav Shamshon Rephael Hirsch, Bereishit 17:10 (Isaac Levy translation)

ספר הישר לרבינו תם (חלק החדושים) סימן רפה

Sefer Ha-yashar of Rabbeinu Tam (Novellae) 285

דברים כט: ט–יא

Devarim 29:9–11

דברים ל:ו

Devarim 30:6

And the Lord your God will circumcise your hearts and the hearts of your descendants to love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul for the sake of your life.

רש”י שבת קלז:

Rashi, Shabbat 137b

רמב”ן ויקרא כד: י

Ramban, Vayikra 24:10

ראבי”ה חלק א – שבת רעט

Ra’aviyah I, Shabbat 279

רי”ף שבת נו.

Rif Shabbat 56a

תוספות עבודה זרה כז.

Tosafot, Avoda Zara 27a

רמ”א יו”ד רסד: א

וי”א [=ויש אומרים] דאשה לא תמול (סמ”ק והגהות מרדכי), וכן נוהגין להדר אחר איש.

Rema YD 264:1

There are those who say that a woman should not perform circumcision, and so our practice is to seek out a man.

מדרש תהלים לה:ב

Midrash Tehillim 35:2

ספר מהרי”ל (מנהגים) הלכות מילה א

Maharil, Minhagim, Laws of Mila 1

תשובות ופסקים לחכמי אשכנז וצרפת סימן ע”א קובץ שיטות קמאי, קידושין כט.

מעשה באחד שנולד לו בן וצותה לו אמו לעשותה בעל ברית, וחמותו אמרה אני אזכה.

Responsa and Rulings from sages of Ashkenaz and France, 71, Kovetz Shitot Kamai, Kiddushin 29a

A case of one who had a son born to him, and his mother ordered him to make her the ba’al berit, and his mother-in-law said, I should merit it.

ספר תשב”ץ קטן סימן שצז

Tashbetz Katan 397

Dr. Elisheva Baumgarten, Mothers and Children: Jewish Family Life in Medieval Europe (Princeton University Press, 2013), 47–75

סדר רב עמרם גאון, סדר מילה

Seder (Siddur) Rav Amram Gaon, Mila

סדר רב עמרם גאון סדר מילה

Seder (Siddur) Rav Amram Gaon, Mila

הרב פרופסור דניאל שפרבר, מנהגי ישראל, כרך א, פרק ד מוסד הרב קוק 1990, עמ’ סה-סו

Rabbi Daniel Sperber, Minhagei Yisrael I, chapter 4 (Mossad Ha-Rav Kook, 1990), 65-66.

ספר מהרי”ל (מנהגים) הלכות מילה כב

Maharil Minhagim, Mila 22

רמ”א יו”ד רסה:יא

Rema YD 265:11

הרב מרדכי אליהו, דרכי טהרה, עמ’ 43

Rav Mordechai Eliyahu, Darchei Tahara, 43

שבת קלז:

Shabbat 137b

רמב”ם הלכות מילה ג:ג

ואחר כך מברך אבי הבן או המל או אחד מן העומדין שם, ברוך אתה יי’ אלקינו מלך העולם אשר קידש ידיד מבטן.

Rambam, Laws of Mila 3:3

שולחן ערוך יו”ד רסה:א

Shulchan Aruch YD 265:1

תשובת הרב ברוך גיגי למערכת דרכיה, 24.8.26

Response of Rav Baruch Gigi to Deracheha, 8.24.26

Q&A

Sometimes a quick exchange communicates more effectively, and more personally, than an article. Sometimes, just seeing that others share our questions can make us feel more connected.

Our posted questions and answers are an opportunity to learn from each other. To ask a question of your own, click here!

Hashkafic Q&A

Why should a Jewish boy’s life begin with a surgical procedure?

These are serious concerns.

In a landmark article, Rabbi Dr. Avraham Steinberg summarizes more modern options for pain relief. He ultimately supports offering parents the option of using Emla, a desensitizing cream:⁷

Rabbi Avraham Steinberg, MD, “Anesthesia in Circumcision Medical and Halachic Consideration,” ASSIA: Jewish Medical Ethics VI, no. 1 (2007): 15–24

Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach also supported the use of analgesic cream for berit mila when considered safe. Some authorities limit its use to cases where the baby is perceived as more weak.⁸

We have also seen that berit mila is a classic identifying marker of Jewish peoplehood.

Yet another approach to berit mila draws a parallel to the service of God through sacrifice:

מדרש תנחומא וירא ו

Tanchuma, Veyera 6

ד”ר רננה רביצקי פילזר, “מילה של אמא”, מקור ראשון 14.3.19

Dr. Renana Ravitzky Pilzer, “A Mother’s Mila,” Makor Rishon, March 14, 2019

How are women part of the berit in berit mila?

The mitzva of mila is closely associated with covenant, to the point that it is called berit mila or a beris for short. In what way are women part of this covenant?

In a close reading of the passage from Bereishit, Rav Shamshon Rephael Hirsch distinguishes between the physical element of the mitzva and what removing the foreskin symbolizes:

רש”ר הירש בראשית יז:י

Rav Shamshon Rephael Hirsch, Bereishit 17:10 (Isaac Levy translation)

ספר הישר לרבינו תם (חלק החדושים) סימן רפה

Sefer Ha-yashar of Rabbeinu Tam (Novellae) 285

The first beracha focuses on the physical act of circumcision, while the second extends to the broader covenantal themes that circumcision represents.

A passage in Devarim spells out clearly that God’s covenant is with the entire Jewish people, including women:

דברים כט: ט–יא

Devarim 29:9–11

In the following chapter, the Torah introduces a metaphorical circumcision that transcends the physical, removing barriers in the heart and soul that impede love of God:

דברים ל:ו

Devarim 30:6

And the Lord your God will circumcise your hearts and the hearts of your descendants to love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul for the sake of your life.

This idea would seem to apply equally to women and men.

רש”י שבת קלז:

Rashi, Shabbat 137b

רמב”ן ויקרא כד: י

Ramban, Vayikra 24:10

Reader Q&A

Podcast

Click here to sponsor this episode!

In Brief

In Depth

Mila

Bereishit 17:7–14

Mechilta de-Rabbi Yishmael, Bo - Masechta De-Pischa 5

Keritot 9a

Nedarim 31b

Vayikra 12:2–4

Maharal, Tiferet Yisrael 2

Midrash Tanchuma, Tazria 7

Why should a Jewish boy’s life begin with a surgical procedure?

Rabbi Avraham Steinberg, MD, “Anesthesia in Circumcision Medical and Halachic Consideration,” ASSIA: Jewish Medical Ethics VI, no. 1 (2007): 15–24

Tanchuma, Veyera 6

Dr. Renana Ravitzky Pilzer, “A Mother’s Mila,” Makor Rishon, March 14, 2019

Beit Ha-bechira, Berachot 48b

Kiddushin 29a

Tosafot Rid, Kiddushin 29a, s.v. Ihi

Ritva, Kiddushin 29a, s.v. Ve-ihi mena lan

Sefer Ha-makneh, Kiddushin 29a

Responsa Maharach Or Zarua 11

Shemot 4:25

Avoda Zara 27a

Avoda Zara 27a

Rashi ad loc

Sheiltot of Rav Achai Gaon, Vayera 10

How are women part of the berit in berit mila?

Rav Shamshon Rephael Hirsch, Bereishit 17:10 (Isaac Levy translation)

Sefer Ha-yashar of Rabbeinu Tam (Novellae) 285

Devarim 29:9–11

Devarim 30:6

Rashi, Shabbat 137b

Ramban, Vayikra 24:10

Ra’aviyah I, Shabbat 279

Rif Shabbat 56a

Tosafot, Avoda Zara 27a

Rema YD 264:1

Midrash Tehillim 35:2

Maharil, Minhagim, Laws of Mila 1

Responsa and Rulings from sages of Ashkenaz and France, 71, Kovetz Shitot Kamai, Kiddushin 29a

Tashbetz Katan 397

Dr. Elisheva Baumgarten, Mothers and Children: Jewish Family Life in Medieval Europe (Princeton University Press, 2013), 47–75

Seder (Siddur) Rav Amram Gaon, Mila

Seder (Siddur) Rav Amram Gaon, Mila

Rabbi Daniel Sperber, Minhagei Yisrael I, chapter 4 (Mossad Ha-Rav Kook, 1990), 65-66.

Maharil Minhagim, Mila 22

Rema YD 265:11

Rav Mordechai Eliyahu, Darchei Tahara, 43

Shabbat 137b

Rambam, Laws of Mila 3:3

Shulchan Aruch YD 265:1

Response of Rav Baruch Gigi to Deracheha, 8.24.26

Further Reading

Notes

Sefer Ha-chinuch, Order and Counting of the Mitzvot

Nishmat Avraham YD 261

Megilla 20a

Tosafot, Kiddushin 29a, s.v. oto ve-lo ota

Rambam, Laws of Mila 1:1

Bereishit 25:1–2

Rambam, Laws of Kings 10:8

Sefer Shibolei Ha-leket, Mila 3

Rambam, Mila 2:1

Shulchan Aruch YD 264:1

Birat Migdal Oz, Bereicha Elyona, Ha-nachal Ha-revi’i, 3-4

Rav Baruch Gigi, Response to Deracheha, 8.24.26

Magen Avraham, OC 551:3

Ritva Shabbat 137b

Sources

Mila

Bereishit 17:7–14

Mechilta de-Rabbi Yishmael, Bo - Masechta De-Pischa 5

Keritot 9a

Nedarim 31b

Vayikra 12:2–4

Maharal, Tiferet Yisrael 2

Midrash Tanchuma, Tazria 7

Rabbi Avraham Steinberg, MD, “Anesthesia in Circumcision Medical and Halachic Consideration,” ASSIA: Jewish Medical Ethics VI, no. 1 (2007): 15–24

Tanchuma, Veyera 6

Dr. Renana Ravitzky Pilzer, “A Mother’s Mila,” Makor Rishon, March 14, 2019

Beit Ha-bechira, Berachot 48b