Page 296 - 20818_park-c_efi
P. 296

20818_efi-ab - 20818_park-C_efi-ab | 10 - A | 18-08-20 | 13:46:25 | SR:-- | Cyan
  20818_efi-ab - 20818_park-C_efi-ab | 10 - A | 18-08-20 | 13:46:25 | SR:-- | Black
  #20818_efi-ab - 20818_park-C_efi-ab | 10 - A | 18-08-20 | 13:46:25 | SR:-- | Yellow
  20818_efi-ab - 20818_park-C_efi-ab | 10 - A | 18-08-20 | 13:46:25 | SR:-- | Magenta
               We do not circumcise a sick baby. Therefore, Shmuel specifies that              the eye, in spite of the fact that the physicians say there is no danger
               the implication of the Mishnah is that after he recovers from his ill-          to life.
               ness, one still has to wait seven days until he is rehabilitated and his           There is a big question we can raise about this topic. The Gemara
               strength returns to normal. The time of rehabilitation is seven days.           says that a baby should be washed in hot water before and after the
               There is something similar to this written in Responsa Divrei Malkiel           circumcision. If the water spilled after the circumcision, we desecrate
               (Vol. 2 #131:1).                                                                Shabbos and heat up more water to wash him, because of the danger, as
 #
                  Now we come to answer our question. Lachrymal gland infections               explained in Tractate Shabbos (134b). In practice, the Shulchan Aruch
               nowadays can be treated and cured, thanks to medications that were              (Orach Chaim #331:9) writes: At the time of the Gemara, if the baby
               discovered in recent years. However, until 100 years ago, this illness          was not washed with hot water before and after the circumcision, he
               was liable to cause blindness and danger to life. Therefore, there is no        would be in danger. Nowadays, the practice is not to wash the baby at
               doubt that this illness is not halachically considered “mild pain.” Rath-       all, because natures have changed. If this applies to washing the baby,
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   10
               er the medications we have nowadays prevent this type of infection              can we not say the same for the danger of eye-infections, especially
               from spreading or worsening. Therefore, when the baby has a serious             since theTeshuras Shai testified that he has never heard of someone
               conjunctive inflammation, with redness and secretion of pus, even               dying from an eye infection?
               though it can be easily treated, one should probably wait seven days.              Tosfos (Mo’ed Katan 11a) explain that our natures have changed,
               After all, fever can also be easily treated, yet we still wait seven days       and certain things that were beneficial to one’s health at the time of
               after recovery, as explained in the Shulchan Aruch cited above, since           the Gemara are nowadays dangerous. Even the remedies mentioned
               the seven days are not meant to cure the baby but these are the days            in the Gemara are of no benefit to us today. The Tiferes Yisrael (Shab-
               of rehabilitation after the recovery. So, too, in our case, we wait seven       bos 19:1, Boaz), in a discussion on the practice of metzitzah (sucking
               days after the baby has recovered from his infection.                           blood) also raises the possibility that natures have changed nowadays.
                   In Responsa Divrei Malkiel (Vol. 2 #131) there is a question about          Likewise, the Chazon Ish (Even Ha’ezer 12:7) says that in our days,
               a city where most of the newborn boys had secretions and mucus                  nature has changed, and urine and sperm come from one duct, unlike
               in their eyes, and the mohelim delayed the circumcisions as a result.           in the days of the Talmud, when two ducts were postulated. Perhaps
               Some people were opposed to this. They claimed the mucus stemmed                we can say the same about an eye infection?
               from the eyelids, rather than the internal eye. Others claimed there               I posed this question to my father-in-law, Rav Y. S. Elyashiv zt”l,
               was no pain to the babies at all, and the secretions resulted from the          and he answered me: Had the physicians understood the words of
               babies looking at the light of the world more than necessary. As hap-           our Sages, and claimed that nature has changed, we would rely on
               pens to adults who look at the sun too much, these were the natural             their words. However, since they do not understand our Sages’ words
               effects on their eyes. The Sefer D’var Eliyahu writes that one needs            about the connection between the eye and the heart, this means we
               expertise to distinguish between different types of tears. Practically,         are missing knowledge on this topic, so we do not have the capacity to
               the Divrei Malkiel concludes:                                                   say that nature has changed.
                  1.  If one sees mucus in the eyes of a newborn, it is prohibited to             This is different than washing after circumcision (and metzitzah),
                    circumcise  him.  One  should  not  pay  heed  to  the  physicians’        or the spermatic ducts. Regarding these things, the poskim understand
                    words, which are in opposition to an explicit law in the Torah             the words of the Sages so they were able to determine that nature has
                    and in the Talmud and poskim.                                              changed.




        282              1  Medical-HalacHic Responsa of Rav ZilbeRstein                       Shabbos in an Ophthalmology Department  2                       299
   291   292   293   294   295   296   297   298   299   300   301