מילת יילודים מתים: מנהג, הלכה, גאוגרפיה והיסטוריה ומה שביניהם

Translated title of the contribution: Circumcision of Stillbirths: Between Custom, Halakhah, Geography and History

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

The custom to circumcise newborns who died before being circumcised by their parents is addressed in a short but important responsum by R. Nahshon, Gaon of Sura (872–879). This article examines the development of the practice, and the way in which this geonic responsum was transmitted among later halakhic authorities. Rabbis active in Rome in the late 11th – early 12th centuries rejected this practice. Their approach that Halakhah is directed to the living and not to the dead led them to dispute R. Nahshon's responsum, taking liberties with its language and contents in the process. In contrast, the Gaon's ruling was adopted by the sages of Barcelona and Lucena. They offered various reasons in support of their position, such as preventing the uncircumcised newborns descent to Gehenna or assuring its place at the Resurrection of the Dead. These legal rulings, examined more broadly, reveal their image of the world after death. The responsum by the Italian sages opposing the practice was the basis for halakhic discussion in Ashkenaz even though the custom of circumcising the dead was prevalent there. The article concludes with an analysis of the tension between textual sources and the custom as practiced.
Translated title of the contributionCircumcision of Stillbirths: Between Custom, Halakhah, Geography and History
Original languageHebrew
Pages (from-to)453-475
Number of pages23
Journalציון: רבעון לחקר תולדות ישראל
Volume79
Issue number4
StatePublished - 2014

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Circumcision of Stillbirths: Between Custom, Halakhah, Geography and History'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this