The 'Drawn Foreskin' ('Moshekh Orlah'): Undoing Circumcision and Foreskin Restoration in Classical History and in the Talmudic Sources

This piece explores how Jews living under Hellenistic and Roman cultural pressures sometimes reversed their circumcisions, a practice documented not only in Greek and Roman sources but also in the Talmud.

The sources gathered here span halakhic discussions, aggadic narratives, and midrashic interpretations, all centering on the symbolic, legal, and physical status of the foreskin.

From Talmudic references to biblical figures such as Adam and Achan "drawing their foreskins forward" (מושך בערלתו), to rabbinic debates about whether re-circumcision is required—and how often—it becomes clear that this issue intersected with identity, piety, ritual eligibility, and communal belonging.

This piece situates Talmudic discussions alongside Greco-Roman social norms, highlighting the cultural tensions that shaped Jewish attitudes toward the body and religious identity.

It also addresses the legal status of restored foreskins in halakhic contexts, particularly with regard to priestly consumption of teruma, and considers rare anatomical categories such as tumtum and androgynos.

On the Hebrew Term ‘Arel’ (ערל = Uncircumcised)

See Hebrew Wikipedia, “ערל“, my translation:

An arel is a person who has not undergone circumcision and still has a foreskin.¹

Since Jews are commanded to remove the foreskin through brit milah (circumcision), and non-Jews are not obligated to do so, the term arel came to be used to refer to a non-Jew.

This usage already appears in the Bible, particularly as a slur for the Philistines.²

From Talmudic Hebrew onward, the term arel was commonly used for any non-Jew, regardless of whether they were actually uncircumcised, and the term also appears in modern Hebrew literature.

However, in halakha, the term arel usually refers specifically to a Jew who is obligated to be circumcised but has not done so—whether he deliberately chose not to fulfill the commandment, or was prevented from doing so due to some external constraint such as medical reasons.

A Jew who is not circumcised is subject to various legal consequences.

Punishment

A Jew who intentionally fails to circumcise himself not only neglects the positive commandment of brit milah but is also liable for the punishment of karet (spiritual excision).

This is the only positive commandment (מצוות עשה)—aside from failing to bring the Passover sacrifice—that carries the penalty of karet if neglected.

This punishment is mentioned in the Torah in Parashat Lekh Lekha, after God commands Abraham regarding circumcision:

“An uncircumcised male who does not circumcise the flesh of his foreskin—that soul shall be cut off from his people; he has broken My covenant.” (Genesis 17:14)

Outline

1. On the Hebrew Term ‘Arel’ (ערל = Uncircumcised)

2. Foreskin restoration - General

3. Achan Restored his foreskin (Sanhedrin 43b-44b)

4. Adam Restored his foreskin (Sanhedrin 38a-39b)

5. Abraham doesn’t save from Gehenna Jewish men who had sex with non-Jewish women, as such acts cause their foreskin to be restored, and Abraham no longer recognizes them (Eruvin 19a)

6. Drawn Foreskin: eligibility to eat terumah, and debate whether required to be re-circumcised (Yevamot 72a)

   1. Re-Circumcision of One Whose Foreskin Was Drawn Forward: Torah vs. Rabbinic Requirement

   2. Re-Circumcision After Foreskin Restoration (Genesis 17:13–14): R’ Yehuda’s Concern for Risk; The Case of Bar-Kokhba’s Followers and Multiple Circumcisions

   3. Eligibility of Priests with Atypical Anatomy to Eat Teruma: indeterminate gender (=Tumtum), Drawn Foreskin / Born Circumcised, Hermaphrodite (=Androgynos)

Foreskin restoration - General

See Wikipedia, “Foreskin restoration”, with slight adjustments:

Foreskin restoration or foreskin reconstruction refers to the process of recreating the foreskin of the penis, which has been removed by circumcision or injury. Foreskin restoration is primarily accomplished by stretching the residual skin of the penis, but surgical methods also exist [...]

In the Greco-Roman world, uncircumcised genitals, including the foreskin, were considered a sign of beauty, civility, and masculinity.

In Classical Greek and Roman societies (8th century BCE to 6th century CE), exposure of the glans was considered disgusting and improper, and did not conform to the Hellenistic ideal of gymnastic nudity.³

Men with short foreskins would wear the kynodesme to prevent exposure.

As a consequence of this social stigma, an early form of foreskin restoration known as epispasm was practiced among some Jews in Ancient Rome (8th century BCE to 5th century CE).

Foreskin restoration is of ancient origin and dates back to the Alexandrian Empire (333 BCE). Hellenized Jews stopped circumcising their sons to avoid persecution and so they could participate in the gymnasium.

Some Jews at this time attempted to restore their foreskins, which caused conflict within Second Temple Judaism, some Jews viewed circumcision as an essential part of the Jewish identity (1 Maccabees 1:15).

Following the death of Alexander, Judea and the Levant was part of the Seleucid Empire under Antiochus Epiphanes (175-164 BCE). Antiochus outlawed the Jewish practice of circumcision, both 1st and 2nd Maccabees record Jewish mothers being put to death for circumcising their sons (1:60-61 and 6:10 respectively).

Some Jews during Antiochus' persecution sought to undo their circumcision.

Within the 1st century CE, there were still some forms of foreskin restoration being sought after (1 Corinthians 7:18).

During the third Jewish-Roman Wars (CE 132–135), the Romans had renamed Jerusalem as Aelia Capitolian and may have banned circumcision; however, Roman sources from the period only mention castration and say nothing about banning circumcision.

During the Bar Kokhba revolt, there is Rabbinic evidence that records, Jews who had removed their circumcision (meaning that foreskin restoration was still being practiced) they were recircumcised, voluntarily or by force.

Achan Restored his foreskin (Sanhedrin 43b-44b)

R' Ile’a states that the biblical Achan (a figure depicted in the Book of Joshua as wicked) restored his foreskin (מושך בערלתו).

This is homiletically derived from the verse “They have also transgressed My covenant,” echoing Genesis 17:14’s phrase about one who “has violated My covenant” by rejecting circumcision.⁴

ואמר רבי אילעא, משום רבי יהודה בר מספרתא:

עכן מושך בערלתו היה

כתיב הכא: ״וגם עברו את בריתי״,

וכתיב התם: ״את בריתי הפר״.

[...]

And R' Ile’a says further in the name of R' Yehuda bar Masparta:

Achan, in addition to his other evil actions, would stretch his remaining foreskin

in order to conceal the fact that he was circumcised.

An allusion to this offense is found in the wording of this verse:

Here, with regard to Achan, it is written: “They have also transgressed My covenant,”

and there, with regard to circumcision, it is written: “He has violated My covenant” (Genesis 17:14).

Adam Restored his foreskin (Sanhedrin 38a-39b)

The same thing was said a few pages earlier in that tractate, this time regarding Adam.⁵

רבי יצחק אמר:

מושך בערלתו היה

R' Yitzḥak says:

He was one who drew his foreskin forward,

so as to remove any indication that he was circumcised.

Abraham doesn’t save from Gehenna Jewish men who had sex with non-Jewish women, as such acts cause their foreskin to be restored, and Abraham no longer recognizes them (Eruvin 19a)

Eruvin.19a.10

The Talmud states that Abraham intervenes on behalf of sinners who are sentenced to Gehenna.

However, Abraham refuses to save Jewish men (בר מישראל) who had sex with non-Jewish women (בא על הגויה), as such acts cause their foreskin to be restored (משכה ערלתו), and Abraham no longer “recognizes” (מבשקר) them.⁶

הא דכתיב: ״עוברי בעמק הבכא״,

ההוא דמחייבי ההיא שעתא בגיהנם,

ואתי אברהם אבינו

ומסיק להו

ומקבל להו.

בר מישראל שבא על הגויה,

דמשכה ערלתו

ולא מבשקר ליה.

that which is written: “Those who pass through the valley of weeping” (Psalms 84:7), which implies that sinners descend to Gehenna, should be explained as follows:

There it speaks of those who are liable at that time for punishment in Gehenna,

but our father Abraham comes

and raises them up

and receives them. He does not leave the circumcised behind and allow them to enter Gehenna,

except for a Jew who had relations with a gentile woman,

in punishment for which his foreskin is drawn,

and our father Abraham does not recognize him as one of his descendants.

Drawn Foreskin: eligibility to eat terumah, and debate whether required to be re-circumcised (Yevamot 72a)

Yevamot.72a.5-10

Re-Circumcision of One Whose Foreskin Was Drawn Forward: Torah vs. Rabbinic Requirement

Rav Huna states that by Torah law, someone whose foreskin was “drawn forward” (משוך) may partake of teruma (i.e. remains considered circumcised).

However, the Sages instituted a rabbinic decree requiring him to be circumcised again due to his uncircumcised appearance.⁷

אמר רב הונא:

דבר תורה,

משוך —

אוכל בתרומה,

ומדבריהם גזרו עליו,

מפני שנראה כערל

[...]

Rav Huna said:

By Torah law,

if one had been circumcised, but subsequently the residual foreskin was drawn forward by itself or manually so that it covered the corona,

he may partake of teruma, as he is considered circumcised.

However, from the words of the Sages, they decreed that he must be circumcised again

because he looks as if he were uncircumcised.

[...]

Re-Circumcision After Foreskin Restoration (Genesis 17:13–14): R’ Yehuda’s Concern for Risk; The Case of Bar-Kokhba’s Followers and Multiple Circumcisions

A baraita states that if someone had their residual foreskin pulled forward to cover the corona, he must undergo a second circumcision, as he is not considered circumcised.

R' Yehuda objects, claiming such surgery is dangerous and should not be performed.

His colleagues rebut by citing the example of many men in the time of Ben-Koziva (=Bar-Kokhba) who reversed foreskin restoration and were successfully re-circumcised, going on to have children.

They cite Genesis 17:13, “himmol yimmol” (המול ימול), a doubled verb form interpreted as permitting or requiring circumcision “even 100 times.”

They further cite Genesis 17:14, “He has broken My covenant,” to include those who artificially restore the appearance of an uncircumcised state.

משוך --

צריך שימול

[...]

רבי יהודה אומר:

לא ימול,

מפני שסכנה היא לו.

אמרו לו:

והלא הרבה מלו בימי בן כוזיבא

והולידו בנים ובנות,

שנאמר: ״המול ימול״,

אפילו מאה פעמים,

ואומר: ״את בריתי הפר״

לרבות את המשוך

[...]

the following baraita: One whose residual foreskin was drawn forward so that it covers the corona

requires a second circumcision, indicating that he is not considered circumcised.

[...]

R' Yehuda says:

He should not be circumcised

because it would be dangerous for him to do so.

His colleagues said to him:

But weren’t there many who had drawn their residual foreskins forward and subsequently were circumcised a second time in the days of ben Koziva, otherwise known as bar Kokheva,

and they fathered sons and daughters.

Such re-circumcision is necessary, as it is stated: “He must surely be circumcised [himmol yimmol]” (Genesis 17:13),

the double verb form indicating: Even one hundred times.

And furthermore, it says: “He has broken My covenant” (Genesis 17:14),

which comes to include one whose foreskin was drawn forward.

[...]

Eligibility of Priests with Atypical Anatomy to Eat Teruma: indeterminate gender (=Tumtum), Drawn Foreskin / Born Circumcised, Hermaphrodite (=Androgynos)

1. Tumtum (טומטום): A priest who is a tumtum (whose sex is indeterminate due to covered genitalia) may not eat teruma, but his wives and slaves may.

2. Drawn Foreskin (משוך) / Born Circumcised:⁸ A priest who was either circumcised but had the foreskin drawn forward afterward, or was born without a foreskin, may eat teruma.

3. Hermaphrodite (אנדרוגינוס - “Androgynos”): A circumcised priest who is an androginos (possessing both male and female genitals) may eat teruma.⁹

1. טומטום —

   1. אין אוכל בתרומה,

   2. נשיו ועבדיו — אוכלין.

2. משוך, ונולד כשהוא מהול —

   1. הרי אלו אוכלים.

3. אנדרוגינוס —

   1. אוכל בתרומה

1. A priest who is a tumtum

   1. may not partake of teruma,

   2. but his wives and slaves may partake of it.

2. A priest who had been circumcised, but subsequently the residual foreskin was drawn forward, and similarly one who was born circumcised, i.e., without a foreskin,

   1. may partake of teruma.

3. A priest who is a hermaphrodite [androginos], possessing both male and female genitals, and was circumcised

   1. may partake of teruma, as whether he is male or female he is entitled to eat teruma

1. ערלה.

Notably, this same word is used for the halachic category of fruit that grows within three years of the transplanting of its tree.

See Wikipedia, “Orlah”:

The prohibition on orlah fruit (lit. "uncircumcised" fruit) is a command found in the Bible not to eat fruit produced by a tree during the first three years after planting.

In rabbinical writings, the orlah prohibition (Hebrew: איסור ערלה) is counted as one of the negative commandments among the 613 commandments […]

The Hebrew word orlah literally means "uncircumcised".

The use of this term is explained by Shlomo Ephraim Luntschitz as meaning "hidden and sealed" […]

2. See my recent discussion of this, in a footnote to my “Appendix 2 – “Circumcised” as a Metonym for “Jewish”: Vows Concerning Benefit from the 'Circumcised' and the 'Uncircumcised' (Mishnah Nedarim 3:11)”, here.

3. See Wikipedia, “Gymnasium (ancient Greece)“, with slight adjustmens:

The gymnasium (Ancient Greek: […] gymnásion) in Ancient Greece functioned as a training facility for competitors in public games.

It was also a place for socializing and engaging in intellectual pursuits.

The name comes from the Ancient Greek term gymnós, meaning "naked" or "nude".

Only adult male citizens were allowed to use the gymnasia.

Athletes competed nude, a practice which was said to encourage aesthetic appreciation of the male body, and to be a tribute to the gods […]

The word gymnasium is the latinisation of the Greek noun […] gymnasion, "public place for physical exercises; exercise area", in pl[ural] "bodily exercises" and generally "school", which in turn is derived from the common Greek adjective […] gymnos meaning "naked" or "nude", by way of the related […] gymnazo, whose meaning is "to train naked", "train in gymnastic exercise", generally "to train, to exercise".

The verb had this meaning because the athletes undressed in changing rooms called apodyteriums and trained naked, rubbing their bodies with olive oil and then cleaning with the strigil.

Historically, the gymnasium was used for exercise, communal bathing (thermae), and later scholarly and philosophical pursuits […]

While the origins of physical exercise regimes was thought to be Sparta of Lacaedemon, or Knossos of Crete, the practice of exercising in the nude had its beginnings in the 7th century BCE.

4. I cited this passage in my recent series on this sugya, see “Pt2 The Confession, Punishment, and Atonement of Achan in Joshua 7 (Sanhedrin 43b-44b)“, section “Achan’s Multiple Additional Major Transgressions and Their Scriptural Allusions (Joshua 7:11, 15)” > “Achan's Circumcision Concealment (Genesis 17:14)“.

5. Cited in my piece “Pt2 The First Man: Talmudic Reflections on Adam's Creation (Sanhedrin 38a-39b)”, section “Adam was a heretic; concealed his circumcision; and was a disbeliever”.

6. I.e. Abraham no longer recognizes them as his descendants.

On the connection between Abraham and circumcision, see Wikipedia, “Brit milah”:

According to the Book of Genesis, God commanded the biblical patriarch Abraham to be circumcised, an act to be followed by his male descendants on the eighth day of life, symbolizing the covenant between God and the Jewish people […]

According to the Hebrew Bible, [God] commanded the biblical patriarch Abraham to be circumcised, an act to be followed by his descendants […]

7. “he looks like one uncircumcised (ערל)”.

8. נולד כשהוא מהול.

On “Born Circumcised” in the Talmud, see previous Appendix, where I discuss it at length, here: “Appendix - ‘Born Circumcised’: The Case of the Foreskin-Free Newborn in Talmudic Sources“.

9. Since he is either male or female, and both are permitted to eat teruma.