Rabbi Eliezer Waldenberg outlines very clearly his objections in one of his responsa. (Tzitz eliezer, )
A. The mohel deceives the parents as they are hiring him to cut the foreskin with a knife as has been the custom. In fact, when the clamp is applied, the crushed skin becomes dead and limp such that, if left alone, it would fall off by itself (much like the stump of the umbilical cord of a newborn). He is therefore not cutting living tissue.
B. There is no priah done when a clamp is applied.*
C. There is no bleeding when a clamp kills the living tissue of a foreskin.
D. When there is no bleeding, there is no possibility of doing metzitzah, another important component of the bris procedure.
E. The blessings which are recited on this entire procedure are invalid because the procedure is invalid – therefore the blessings are considered brakhot levatala, blessings made in vain, a serious offense. (as per the 3rd of the Ten Commandments, Exodus 20:7)
F. There is no excuse for the excessive pain inflicted upon the child through the crushing mechanism of the clamp. He quotes a renowned doctor’s comments about the trauma such a piercing pain can inflict upon a child, and the possibility of the child going into cardiac arrest.
G. Regarding the approbation which was granted by the late Chief Rabbi Isaac Herzog over the use of the device, Rabbi Waldenberg records rabbi Herzog’s anger over being deceived by people who had described the clamp and its outcome. His glowing recommendation of its use was based on hearsay descriptions, and not personally witnessing the device in use. He subsequently retracted any former support of the device.
H. Similarly, Rabbi Tzvi Pesach Frank had approved of the device until he actually saw it in action. After witnessing a bris performed with a clamp, he reportedly said, “This is not the circumcision which God commanded us to perform,” and proceeded to withdraw all his support for the clamp’s use.
I. Rabbi Waldenberg concludes his comments with a charge to the community to see the clamp is eradicated from our midst and that a father should be strongly encouraged to avoid using a mohel who will use this device on his son.
(J.) Finally, in a later response, he claims that a mohel who uses this device on the Sabbath is in complete violation of desecrating the Sabbath (Chillul Shabbat). (Tzitz Eliezer 19:68)
* This argument is called to question by Rabbi Moshe Feinstein, Iggerot Moshe Y”D 1:155, who points out that any mohel might be skilled enough to do priah in the same moment as the milah. No one questions the validity of the bris if the mohel happens to remove the priah membrane along with the foreskin. He derives from a passage in the Talmud Yerushalmi Shabbat 17, Column 2, Chapter 19, Halakha 6 that there were mohels who were skilled in removing the priah membrane along with the foreskin, so much so that they were called to task if they had to go back and do priah after the milah because it was so accepted that the milah and priah would take place simultaneously, minimizing the invasiveness of the circumcision on the baby.
Thanks for providing such a great and helpful information.I will ensure that I bookmark your blog and will often come back at some point.ReplyDelete