The first thing I should do is say that my assertion in my
original statement that the JPS Torah Commentary (JPSTC) said the
circumcision was symbolic of the division between Israel and the
Canaanites and Egyptians and Philistines regarding chastity isn't
the case.  There is a post-it in the column next to it which I
wrote that says that, they didn't say that.  So, it appears I
smooshed it all in together in my mind.  What the excursus does
say (in paragraph 3) is the symbolism of circumcision of the
foreskin in that the Abrahamic covenant is inextricably linked to
the future generations (i.e. a token in the male reproductive
organ representing the Lord's promise of numerous progeny). 
Also, don't forget the JST on Gen 17:11 which indicates that
circumcision on the eighth day is to indicate baptism on the
eighth year.

And now, I'd like to take this time to plug the Jewish
Publication Society books.  I am almost certain that my posting
their translation of the book of Isaiah each week as well as
posting this excursus constitutes a copyright violation.  The
only thing that assuages my guilt is knowing that people are
buying their books as a result of it.  To date, I know of at
least two people who have purchased the JPS TANAKH as a result of
my postings employing it.  I would also like to plug the Torah
Commentaries (this excursus below is from the JPSTC on Genesis). 
They are top notch and have been well received by Jews and
gentiles alike for their scholarship, presentation, exegesis and
comment on the Hebrew.  Therefore, if you dig this kind of stuff
you will really enjoy owning a personal copy that you too can put
post-it notes in.  The JPS is a non-profit independent publishing
house that does general Judaica as well as children's books,
poetry, fiction and the obligatory holocaust remembrances.  Their
number is 1-800-234-3151 and they will be happy to send you a
catalog.  Anyway, on with the text:


The Jewish Publication Society Torah Commentary on Genesis
Excursus 12
Circumcision, Gen. 17:9-14.

Although the law of circumcision is included in the priestly
legislation of Leviticus 12:4, biblical tradition, as illustrated
by Genesis 17:9-14, consistently assumes that the rite antedates
Sinai.  In the days of Jacob, it is so important to the Israelite
tribes as to be an essential precondition of marriage with
outsiders (Gen. 34:14-17).  Zipporah, wife of Moses circumcises
her son at a critical moment (Exod. 4:25); and the rite is a
prerequisite for participating in the Passover offering before
the Exodus from Egypt (Exod. 12:43-48).  In fact, we are
explicitly told that the Israelites who came out of Egypt were
circumcised (Josh. 5:4).  In this connection, the use of a flint
blade for the operation (Exod. 4:25; Josh. 5:2)--during the
Bronze Age--is as much a testimony to the hoary antiquity of the
custom as evidence of religious conservatism.
	Not only is circumcision the earliest institution of Israel,
its introduction being assigned by our narrative to the time of
Abraham, but the text tacitly implies that it pre-existed the
patriarch since it is taken for granted that he understands the
procedure to be followed even though no specific instructions are
forthcoming.  This should occasion no surprise because
circumcision is widely and independently attested in the
histories of divergent cultures stretching from Anatolia to
western Sudan, from the Australian Aborigines to the Massai of
East Africa, from the Polynesian cultures to the kingdom of
Lesoth in southern Africa.  Herodotus reported that the Egyptians
practiced circumcision "for the sake of cleanliness, considering
it better to be clean than comely" (Histories 2:37).  A stela
from Naga ed-Der in Middle Egypt, written as early as the First
Intermediate Period (23rd century B.C.E.), carries a report of a
mass circumcision ceremony performed an 120 men (ANET, p. 326). 
A tomb relief from Saqqara, stemming from the Sixth Dynasty
(2350--2000 B.C.E.) depicts the operation being conducted on boys
by mortuary priests (ANEP, no. 629).  Various other texts,
pictures, and sculptures of naked males, as well as some mummies,
all support the prevalence of the rite in Egypt, though it is
unknown whether it was restricted to men of a certain class,
whether it was obligatory or voluntary, or what its particular
significance was.  Apart from the Babylonians and Assyrians, most
Semites seem to have practiced circumcision.  Herodotus mentions
Ethiopians, Phoenicians, and Syrians, mistakenly believing that
these peoples borrowed the rite from the Egyptians (Histories
2.104).  In truth, it was practiced in northern Syria during the
early third millennium B.C.E.  Of all the peoples with whom
Israel came into close contact, only the Philistines are
derisively called "uncircumcised" (cf. Judg. 14:3, 1 Sam. 4:6;
18:25, etc.), showing them to have been unique in that respect. 
The story of Dinah and the Shechemites (Gen. 34) is particularly
instructive because these people are "Hivites", not canaanites or
Semites.  Texts like Jeremiah 9:24 and Ezekiel 31:18 and 32:22-30
clearly attest to the wide diffusion of circumcision among people
of Transjordan, Phonecia, and Asia Minor.  Clearly, then, the
originality of the biblical law does not lie in the fact of the
institution itself but in the total transformation of a
widespread and ancient ritual.
	In those cultures that traditionally practice circumcision,
the age at which it is performed may vary widely, but the
overwhelming preference is at puberty or as a prenuptial rite. 
In either case, it takes place a t a crucial period in the male
life cycle and marks the initiation into the common life of his
group.  The biblical shift to the eighth day after birth is a
radical break with existing tradition, severing all connection
with puberty, marriage, and "rites of passage".  This particular
dissociation now permits circumcision to be invested with an
entirely new and original meaning.  The operation owes its
sanction not to any natural reason but solely to its being
divinely ordained.  In the course of its performance, it derives
its significance solely from its being the conscious expression
of the external, immutable covenant between God and Abraham. 
Having been performed, it constitutes the ineradicable token of
the imposition of that covenant upon every generation of his
descendants.  The religious life of the Jews begins, therefore,
on the eighth day of his birth.  Since the circumcision is
performed on each individual at that age and is not, as it is
frequently elsewhere, a ritual practiced collectively, it
underscores the singularity of each Jew's relationship to God,
his personal dedication and obligation as a member of a
covenanted community.  It is the distinguishing mark of Jewish
identity and, more than anything else, has proved to be a
powerfully cohesive force in the struggle for national survival.
	The history of the observance of the institution among Jews
is interwoven with that of the Jewish people itself.  In the
heyday of Hellenism some Jews tried artificially to efface the
signs of circumcision by mean of epispasm, that is, by having the
prepuce drawn forward to cover up the corona (cf. 1 Macc. 1:15;
Yev. 72a).  But when the Seleucid monarch Antiochus IV Epiphanes
proscribed circumcision in 167 B.C.E., Jewish mothers suffered
martyrdom for deliberately violating the royal decree (1 Macc.
1:60; 2 Macc. 6:10).  This kind of resistance was the first sign
of the rebellion that culminated in the Maccabean revolt.  When
the Roman emperor Hadrian (ca. 130 C.E.) made circumcision a
capital crime, this became one of the main causes of the Bar
Kokhba insurrection (132-135 C.E.). Throughout the ages Jews
clung tenaciously to the practice in defiance of ridicule and
persecution on the part of Christian authorities and in the full
consciousness of it vital role in Jewish self-preservation.  It
is important to note, however, that circumcision is not a
sacrament in the Christian sense of the term but an indispensable
obligation of Jewish law, since one born of a Jewish mother is
automatically Jewish.  It is the status of the mother, not the
act of circumcision, that determines the infant's religious
character as a Jew.
	The primary responsibility for circumcision devolves upon
the father.  Since the average Jew is unable to perform the
operation in accordance with the requirements of Jewish law, he
commissions a mohel to act on his behalf.  The mohel is selected
not solely for his skill and learning but also for his piety. 
Similarly, the sandek (Gk. synteknos, "godfather"), who has the
privilege of holding the babe on his knees during the operation,
is expected to be a God=fearing man.  The proper time for
fulfilling the mitzvah is as soon as possible after sunrise on
the eighth day after birth, even if it is a Sabbath or holy day. 
Should the birth take place just before sunset, that day is still
regarded as one complete day.  If, however, the child is born in
the twilight period, rabbinic authority must be sought to the
correct time for performing circumcision.  If circumcision has
been postponed for medical reasons, it may not subsequently be
carried out on a Sabbath or holy day.  Once postponed, it is also
not performed on a Thursday because this might lead unnecessarily
to profanation of the Sabbath, which would be the third day after
circumcision, when the pain is thought to be most intense and
some special treatment might be called for.
	The actual rabbinic procedure consists of three parts. 
First comes the surgical removal of the foreskin with a knife
(hittukh, milah).  Then the inner lining of the prepuce is firmly
held between the thumbnail and index finger of each hand, is torn
down as far as the corona, and then rolled back completely to
expose the glans and the corona (peria`ah).  After this, blood is
sucked from the wound as a means of disinfectant, a rite now
often performed with the aid of a swab or glass tube (metsitsah).
	From early times, the terms for uncircumcision and
circumcision came to be used figuratively.  A mind blocked to
God's commandments has been described as "an uncircumcised heart"
(Lev. 26:41; Jer. 9:25; Ezek. 44:7.9), a heart that required
"circumcising" (Deut. 10:16; 30:6; Jer. 4:4); one unreceptive to
God's unreceptive to God's words as having "an uncircumcised ear"
(Jer. 6:10); one impeded in his speech as having "uncircumcised
lips" (Exod. 6:12, 30).  All these metaphors prove conclusively
that circumcision in Israel was no mere formal outward ritual but
was invested with a spiritual aspect that betokened dedication
and commitment to God.