Tell me more ×
Mi Yodeya is a question and answer site for those who base their lives on Jewish law and tradition and anyone interested in learning more. It's 100% free, no registration required.
up vote 6 down vote favorite

Genesis 21:4 (JPS) And Abraham circumcised his son Isaac when he was eight days old, as God had commanded him.

Starting with Abraham, the Israelite men were circumcised and a boy at the eighth day after birth. It was commanded again in the desert through Moses.

Leviticus 12:3 (JPS) And in the eighth day the flesh of his foreskin shall be circumcised.

But the children born in the desert were not circumcised.

Joshua 5:5 (JPS) For all the people that came out were circumcised; but all the people that were born in the wilderness by the way as they came forth out of Egypt, had not been circumcised.

How is this possible? Did they disobey G-d and not circumcised their children in the desert?

share|improve this question
I was suggested from C.SE to ask here. – Mawia Mar 21 at 4:36
5  
Hi Mawia! You are always welcome to ask here. Just be aware answers here will rely on Jewish tradition when responding. (I don't know if that differs from Christian interpretation of this issue, but just FYI.) – Double AA♦ Mar 21 at 4:41

1 Answer

up vote 3 down vote accepted

According to Talmud (Yevamot 71-72) the reason circumcision was not practiced in the desert is:

  1. Because of the hardships of the way - a 40 year journey is no joke. Since is would have been dangerous for someone right after circumcision to get on the road, and they had no choice but to be on the road, they waited until the trek was over.
  2. Because there was no "northern wind" upon them. The northern wind is considered a cure and it would be dangerous to circumcise without this wind to cure them.

That said, another interesting source exists (פסיקתא דרב כהנא. I didn't have a chance to actually see it, but I've seen a few references to it). According to this source there was circumcision in the desert.

The reference from Joshua is understood as using circumcision as an idiom to achieving a new, higher, level, usually spiritual.

In Deuteronomy 10:16 an expression of "circumcising the heart" appears, being the basis of this explanation.

share|improve this answer
But the children born in the desert should have been circumcised on the eighth day. An eight days old boy need not walk on the road. – Mawia Mar 21 at 9:41
That's why there are two reasons. – sam Mar 21 at 13:26
2  
During travel, the babies could be bumped and jostled. Additionally, there was a risk that a recuperating baby's need for extra care could be neglected in the haste of preparations for immediate travel; it was not so much that the people were continuously traveling, but rather they were liable to have to resume their travels by G-d's command at a moment's notice. | Additionally, Rashi writes that the people of Levi continued to circumcise their sons in the desert despite the risk (Rashi on D'varim 33:9). – Fred Mar 21 at 15:23
1  
You forget how dangerous this was back in the days before antibiotics. Infection was common, and deadly. It's one thing to recuperate in a house with plenty of fresh water and ability to clean the wound, and another to try to do that while journeying. – Ariel Mar 21 at 22:17

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.