Fruit Trees and Foreskins
In Parashat Kedoshim, the Torah introduces the commandment of orlah (注指专职诇指讛), where one is forbidden from eating fruit that grows in the first three years after a tree鈥檚 planting:
讜职讻执讬志转指讘止郑讗讜旨 讗侄诇志讛指讗指謼专侄抓 讜旨谞职讟址注职转侄旨诐謾 讻讎旨诇志注值郑抓 诪址讗植讻指謹诇 讜址注植专址诇职转侄旨芝诐 注讎专职诇指转謻讜止 讗侄转志驻执旨专职讬謶讜止 砖指讈诇止郑砖讈 砖指讈谞执謼讬诐 讬执讛职讬侄芝讛 诇指讻侄譀诐 注植专值诇执謻讬诐 诇止芝讗 讬值讗指讻值纸诇變
When you enter the land and plant any tree for food, you shall regard its fruit as forbidden. Three years it shall be forbidden for you, not to be eaten.
(Lev. 19:23)
But the use of the word orlah here has puzzled generations of commentators, for though it appears frequently in the Torah, it is not typically connected to trees. Indeed we primarily associate the term with circumcision. How are the two uses of orlah related? And can tracing this relationship reveal something new about the rite of circumcision itself?
Rashi interprets the expression vearaltem orlato 讜址注植专址诇职转侄旨诐 注指专职诇指转讜止 as opaque and sealed, meaning that the tree will be closed and unattainable. The Aramaic translation (Onkelos) uses uterahakun rahka 讜旨转职专址讞植拽讜旨谉 专址讞指拽指讗 meaning 鈥渒eep away from.鈥� In the Bible orlah appears most commonly in the context of circumcision, in the sense of flesh covering a body organ (Gen. 17:14). This meaning fits the appearance of the word in various combinations: aral sefataym 注植专址诇 砖职讉驻指挚转指挚讬执诐 (Exod. 6:12, 30) when excess skin on the lips interferes with speech, arela oznam 注植专值诇指讛挚 讗指讝职谞指诐 (Jeremiah 6:10) when excess skin on the ear interferes with hearing, and figuratively, levavam he-arel 诇职讘指挚讘指挚诐 讛侄注指专值诇 (Lev. 26:41) when a cover over the heart interferes with feeling.
While etymological development seems to be from the concrete to the borrowed and the abstract; from orlat habasar 注指专职诇址转 讛址讘指旨砖指讉专鈥攖he foreskin of the flesh, to orlat haets 注指专职诇址转 讛指注值抓鈥攖he forbidden fruit, Midrash Genesis Rabbah flips the direction in its discussion of Abraham鈥檚 circumcision.
The Midrash opens with a parable about a noblewoman:
鈥淲alk before Me and be blameless,鈥� (Gen. 17:1) Rabbi Levi said it is like a noblewoman to whom the king said. [Would you] pass before me. So, she passed before him, and her face blushed [lit. became as orange as turmeric.] She thought, what if some flaw is found on me? The king replied. You have no flaw, except an overgrown nail on your little finger. Cut it and the defect will be gone. This is what God said to Abraham: There is nothing wrong with you but this foreskin, remove it and get rid of the defect and walk before me and be blameless.
(Genesis Rabbah 46:4)
The parallel drawn between Abraham and a female figure is a creative way of including women in the idea of circumcision. But why do the rabbis need to include women? The reason becomes clear in the second part of the Midrash, where circumcision is linked to fertility. Here the rabbis discuss how Abraham knows that “the flesh of your orlah” 讘职旨砖址讉专 注指专职诇址转职讻侄诐 is the foreskin. After all, orlah can be a skin or flesh that covers any body organ.
R. Hunah said in the name of Bar Kaparah. Abraham sat and pondered similar laws of inference (gzera shava 讙职旨讝值专指讛 砖指讈讜指讛). Orlah is used in reference to a human and to a tree. Just as orlah in a tree refers to the place it bears fruits, so also orlah in a human is in the place where he gives fruits (i.e. produces offspring).
To explicitly answer the question of how Abraham knew that orlah was the foreskin, the Midrash uses Talmudic hermeneutics and learns from the orlah of the tree’s fruits that circumcision should be connected to the organ of fertility. In the third part of the Midrash, Rabi Haninah Ben Pazi disagrees with his predecessors and claims that Abraham received a hint from God that circumcision is related to fertility: 鈥淚 will establish my covenant between Me and you, and I will make you exceedingly numerous鈥� (Gen. 17:2 ), that is: I will establish my covenant in the place where (in his body) he will multiply (Genesis Rabbah Ibid.).
This connection between circumcision and fertility is related to a cultural perception that the foreskin symbolizes an excess of masculinity that may threaten a women’s fertility. In this context, foreskin removal can be interpreted as creating a balance between male and female which is necessary for conception.
The link between circumcision and fertility also appears in the biblical text itself when the announcement of Isaac鈥檚 birth interrupts God鈥檚 commandment of circumcision (Gen. 17:10鈥�14) and its execution by Abraham (Ibid. 23鈥�27). As in the Midrash, the biblical narrative highlights that the connection between circumcision and fertility requires the involvement of the woman. Thus, in addition to the mitzvah of circumcision, Genesis includes a name change ceremony where both Abraham and Sarah receive the same addition to their name (Ibid. 15). Also, we may understand Sarah as undergoing a parallel physiological process to Abraham (which also involves bleeding) before conception (Gen. 18:11鈥�12).
The Midrash highlights the aforementioned physiological changes that Abraham and Sarah experience simultaneously (circumcision for Abraham and renewal of menstruation for Sarah) using the image of two locks that can be repaired (so that they can be opened again) only by the same craftsman who created them (Genesis Rabbah 48:19). The Babylonian Talmud refers to this parallel infertility by calling Abraham and Sarah 鈥�tumtumin鈥� 讟讜诪讟讜诪讬谉 (Yevamot 64a), individuals whose sex is unknown because their genitalia are covered or hidden. This image represents a return to the primordial androgynous state in which man was created. The existence of both sexes in one organism brings us back to the use of the term orlah as referring to a tree as a mostly monoecious plant, i.e., having both the female and male reproductive organs.
The literary connection that the Midrash makes between the orlah of the tree and the orlah of man reveals complex cultural work that mediates between two different species. This link leads to an understanding of circumcision as connected to fertility and requiring the involvement of both sexes. We see this reflected in the broader literary activity of the biblical text and in the Midrash, which strive for a balance between Abraham and Sarah in the context of the commandment of circumcision and connect it to the announcement of the birth of Isaac. In this sense, the rabbis鈥� motive for connecting circumcision with fertility can be understood as an attempt to deal with the problematic lack inherent in this commandment鈥攖he absence of the woman.
The publication and distribution of the JTS Commentary are made possible by a generous grant from Rita Dee (锄鈥漧) and Harold Hassenfeld (锄鈥漧).
