0

Theoretically speaking, if someone's foreskin grew back after his Bris Milah, would he need another Bris Milah? Is the idea that the Bris be permanent, and if the foreskin were to grow back, it would have to be cut again? Or is the idea that it be cut for the sake of the Bris Milah, so if it were cut once for that intention, that would be enough?

If it's the latter, what if someone drew out his foreskin? If the idea is that it's cut for the sake of the Bris Milah, his was, and perhaps even though he drew it out, he doesn't need to have it cut again. Or perhaps since he drew it out, he's intentionally undoing his original Bris, and so he needs a new one (as opposed to a case where it naturally grew out, in which case he's not intentionally removing it)?

1

Yevamos 72a talks about the case of משוך, someone who stretched out the skin to look uncircumcised. There's a machlokes there whether he needs a second bris milah, and the halachah is that he does need one, derabanan (Rambam, Hilchos Trumos 7:10).

Bepashtus, the same would apply if the foreskin actually grew back somehow, although maybe you'd have to distinguish between the משוך, who actively went against the covenant of milah by hiding it, versus this case where he didn't do so.

  • You leave out the most important part of the Gemara - that according to the opinion that he does need a Bris d'Rabbanan, it's because of Maris Ayin, which would still be an issue if it grew back somehow. – DonielF Mar 22 at 15:03
  • @DonielF I hear, but you could still argue that Maris Ayin is relevant only if he actually did something that could be misinterpreted, not where it happened on its own. Offhand I can't think of any case where we're concerned about MA in the latter situation. – Meir Mar 22 at 15:05
0
  1. I'm waiting for @Double to post his Halachic answer.

  2. Kabalically-wise it is not needed, as my Rabbi R' Moshe Luria wrote based on Ariz"L that all the Tumah is concentrated in the foreskin during the 8 days since the birth, and once cut, it does not "come back" ever.

    So (as is clear from the Shu"A) the new growth is not technically the foreskin, it's another [type of] skin, there's no way to grow the "original" Tumah foreskin back.

  3. As I commented on Shu"A 264 - it is only proposed for Mar'is Ayn, that the others would not suspect him for not performing Bris. Where this consideration is irrelevant - there's no need for the second cut.

  • 1-2. I’m asking halachically, not Kabbalistically or what’s recommended. 3. As I replied to DoubleAA in the comments, perhaps a distinction can be made between something which looks like a foreskin and something which is a foreskin. – DonielF Mar 21 at 18:40
  • Why -1? What is wrong in the answer? If you are not interested in Kabballah others are. Those are underlying principles that lead the Mechaber also to state that's Maris Ayn only. The foreskin that's cut does not grow back, it's the other skin/meat, therefore it does not need cutting off. – Al Berko Mar 21 at 18:43
  • 3
    The -1 is that "This answer is not useful." This isn't a forum for everyone to post anything tangentially related to the topic at hand: it's a Q&A site. I didn't ask about Kabbalah; if I did, this would be a fine answer, but I didn't. I'm sure there's plenty of information that others would be interested in, but this isn't the place for it. If you think it's worth sharing, there's nothing wrong with asking a question and self-answering it. But this isn't the place for it. – DonielF Mar 21 at 18:53
  • Re #3: If that's what you're answering, that clearly this "foreskin" isn't halachically foreskin, then say it! If you edit that into your post, and remove your points #1-2, I'll remove my downvote. – DonielF Mar 21 at 18:54

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .