Mishneh Torah, Circumcision 3

Sugya Map: The Mechanics of Brit Blessings

• Core Issue: Does the mitzvah of Brit Milah reside in the act (the removal) or the status (the resulting state)?
• Primary Sources: Mishneh Torah, Milah 3:1-3; Berachot 11:11-13; Shabbat 137b; Pesachim 7b (Tosafot).
• Nafka Mina: The variation in blessing text ("al ha-milah" vs. "lamul") and the legitimacy of the father’s unique blessing in the absence of a mohel.

Text Snapshot

• MT 3:1: "הַמָּל בֶּן חֲבֵרוֹ... מְבָרֵךְ... 'עַל הַמִּילָה'. מָל בְּנוֹ... מְבָרֵךְ 'לָמוּל אֶת הַבֵּן'."
• Nuance: The Rambam distinguishes between mitzvah performance on others (prepositional: "concerning") versus self-realization (infinitive: "to"). The Rema (YD 265:1) rejects this, opting for a universal formula, hinting at a divergence in the mahut (essence) of the mitzvah.

Readings

• Rambam (Hilchot Berachot 11:12-13): The chiddush is a formal taxonomy of berachot. If you are the agent (shaliach), the mitzvah is a general obligation; if you are the principal (the father), the mitzvah is a personal imperative ("to circumcise").
• Tzafnat Pa’neach (Rogatchover Gaon): Argues that the debate between Rambam and Ra’avad regarding the father’s blessing hinges on whether the obligation rests on the Beit Din (to ensure a state of mahol) or on the father personally (le-hamilo).

Friction

• Kushya: If the father's blessing is a birkat ha-mitzvah, why does the Rambam permit it only when the father is present? If the mitzvah is absolute, the mohel should suffice as an agent.
• Terutz: As Tosafot (Pesachim 7a) suggests, the father’s blessing is not a technical birkat ha-mitzvah but an expression of hoda'ah (gratitude) for the unique privilege of the paternal role. Thus, it is non-transferable—the mohel cannot "thank" for a father's duty.

Intertext

• Shabbat 137b: The Talmudic root for "Just as you brought him into the covenant."
• Nedarim 32a: The severity of the brit (the malach attacking Moshe) underscores that the brit is the sine qua non of Jewish identity, transcending the physical act.

Psak/Practice

• Practice: While the Shulchan Aruch (YD 265:1) follows the Rambam’s text for the mohel, modern practice largely follows the Rema's preference for "al ha-milah" across the board. The meta-psak takeaway is that ritual uniformity often supersedes the Rambam's hyper-precise linguistic categorization in communal settings.

Takeaway

The brit is simultaneously a technical act of surgery (requiring the mohel) and a relational act of covenantal transmission (requiring the father). One is a legal requirement; the other is an ontological statement of belonging.