RRT 90-94

WOMAN DOCTOR AS MOHEL

QUESTION:

Women in increasing numbers have entered the medical profession, and many of them are obstetricians and gynecologists. Since it is a growing custom among Jewish parents (especially non-Orthodox parents) to have their baby boys circumcised in the hospital by the obstetrician, this raises the question whether, according to Jewish tradition, a woman (and even a Gentile woman) is eligible to perform the operation of milah. (Asked by L.S.F.)

ANSWER:

THE GENERAL QUESTION of who may circumcise was discussed in Reform Responsa, responsum #24, p. 105. Since, however, the above question adds an entirely new element, it seems worthwhile to review, first of all, the general background as mentioned in that responsum. The law as it stands is given in summary in Shulchan Aruch, Yore Deah 264:1. It begins with the general statement that “all are eligible to perform circumcision, even a minor, even a slave, even a woman; and even an uncircumcised Jew, provided there was a medical reason [i.e., hemophilia] for the circumciser not being circumcised.”

This general statement is followed by exceptions, mostly made by Isserles, who ends up with the statement that “a man should seek around for the best and most pious mohel. ” Nevertheless, it must be pointed out at the outset that a mohel is not in any sense an official functionary of the community. A rabbi or a cantor must be appointed formally by the community. A shochet must get a special certificate from the rabbi ( kabbala) attesting to his knowledge of the laws of shechita and his skill, but there is no license, no appointment, required for a man to be a mohel. Anybody who is skilled can perform the function (of course, with the exceptions referred to above). The father himself is, in fact, expected, if he is able, to circumcise his own child; if not, he can pick anybody who is skilled to do it for him. That is why Isserles says one should “look around for a skilled and pious person.” In other words, the mohel is not a functionary. Anybody who is suitable and capable can serve.

However, there is a difference between this general legal permissibility and the strong preference of pious people. For truly Orthodox Jews, the various permissibilities in the law are of no importance. What matters is to find a truly pious (and, of course, skilled) mohel.

This preference was expressed most strongly by Rabbi Eliezer Silver (Honorary President of the Agudas Harabonim), quoted in Taharas Yom Tov by Yom Tov L. Deutsch, Vol. VIII (see Hamoar for Elul 1957). He said: “I have forbidden physicians, most of whom are not observant Jews, to circumcise, but have permitted only skilled mohelim who are religious to approach the fulfillment of this commandment.”

This is, of course, a strict decision beyond the actual requirement of the law, but still it is a permissible one. The rabbinical authorities may always make extra-cautionary decisions, forbidding what may actually be permitted, in cases where they feel the religious situation requires such strictness. These extra prohibitions generally apply for the time of the emergency and in the city of the rabbi’s authority. That is why Rabbi Silver continues: “Thank God, in my city [i.e., Cincinnati] and in my area they listen to me, and they do not permit just any physician to perform the circumcision.” However, aside from this local, extra strictness, our concern is: What is the actual state of the law?

1. There is no question that a Jewish physician who is himself circumcised may legally perform the ritual circumcision. The only question about a Jewish physician arises from the concern expressed by Isserles (ibid.) as to a nonbeliever. Isserles says that a man who rejects the entire Torah or rejects the idea that circumcision is a Divine commandment (i.e., a mumar, one who turns aside or rebels against the Torah), such an irreligious doctor may not legally circumcise. This question has been discussed by many modern authorities, and the tendency of their decision is to be lenient on the matter. The question of the irreligiousness of the Jewish physician is fully discussed by David Hoffmann in his Melamed L’ho-il ( Yore Deah, responsum #80), and he shows that most authorities are lenient on this matter, and even those who are inclined to be strict and agree with Isserles (that a nonbelieving doctor is ineligible) nevertheless grant that if no other mohel were available, he would be acceptable. There is, therefore, no question that a religious Jewish doctor may circumcise and that even a nonreligious one is acceptable when no other is available.

2. May a Gentile doctor perform the operation? The laws which forbid a non-Jew to circumcise were based upon the fact that in the early days every non Jew was an idolater, and there was fear that the idolater would harm the child (see Tosefta, Avoda Zara, 3:12). However, even an idolater was permitted if others were present or if he were a professional. So Israel of Kremsier (14th cent.), in his Hagahos Asheri to the Rosh, b. Avoda Zara 27a, says: “All prohibitions against using Gentile physicians [in general] apply only if the healing by a physician is done by an amateur and without pay, but if done by a professional and for pay, it is absolutely permitted.” Of course, in the spirit of the law, if a Gentile doctor is to do the circumcision, the family should be present, and, of course, the ritual prayers, etc., should be recited by a rabbi or a member of the family.

3. The question of whether a woman may circumcise is based upon the discussion in the Talmud {Avoda Zara 27a) between Rav and Rav Yochanon. The debate centers upon the question as to which is the crucial verse in the commandment given to Abraham when he is given the command to circumcise himself and his family. Rav says that the crucial verse is “Thou shalt keep my covenant” (Genesis 17:9), and Yochanon says that the crucial verse is “Let all born in thy household be circumcised” (17:13). From the analysis of these respective verses, Rav concludes that a woman may not circumcise, and Yochanon concludes that a woman may circumcise. The Tosfos (ad loc.) says that the law is according to Rav arid that a woman may not circumcise; whereas almost all other authorities declare that in all disputes between these two scholars, the decision is according to Yochanon, and most of them agree that a woman may circumcise. Therefore she is listed in the Shulchan Aruch among those who may circumcise. But, of course, it is added that one should in preference look for a skilled man to perform the circumcision.

Let us say, then, that the situation of the law is as follows: Orthodox Jews, out of the natural desire to avoid such changes in practice as may affect Orthodox life, will always prefer a pious mohel. Other people, less Orthodox, will have the physician perform the operation whether he is personally religious or not, and when no Jewish doctor is available, will have a Gentile obstetrician perform the operation; and if the obstetrician is a woman, she will perform the operation. As to all these choices by non-Orthodox Jewish families, it can be said that they are going counter to Orthodox preference; but it cannot be said that such choices are violative of Jewish law.