share torah logo

Genesis 34:14 - Circumcision: dealbreaker for marriage?

Genesis 34:14 - בראשית 34:14

Hebrew Text

וַיֹּאמְרוּ אֲלֵיהֶם לֹא נוּכַל לַעֲשׂוֹת הַדָּבָר הַזֶּה לָתֵת אֶת־אֲחֹתֵנוּ לְאִישׁ אֲשֶׁר־לוֹ עָרְלָה כִּי־חֶרְפָּה הִוא לָנוּ׃

English Translation

and they said to them, We cannot do this thing, to give our sister to one that is uncircumcised; for that would be a reproach to us:

Transliteration

Vayomru alehem lo nuchal laasot hadavar haze latet et achoteinu leish asher lo orlah ki cherpa hi lanu.

Hebrew Leining Text

וַיֹּאמְר֣וּ אֲלֵיהֶ֗ם לֹ֤א נוּכַל֙ לַעֲשׂוֹת֙ הַדָּבָ֣ר הַזֶּ֔ה לָתֵת֙ אֶת־אֲחֹתֵ֔נוּ לְאִ֖ישׁ אֲשֶׁר־ל֣וֹ עׇרְלָ֑ה כִּֽי־חֶרְפָּ֥ה הִ֖וא לָֽנוּ׃
וַיֹּאמְר֣וּ אֲלֵיהֶ֗ם לֹ֤א נוּכַל֙ לַעֲשׂוֹת֙ הַדָּבָ֣ר הַזֶּ֔ה לָתֵת֙ אֶת־אֲחֹתֵ֔נוּ לְאִ֖ישׁ אֲשֶׁר־ל֣וֹ עׇרְלָ֑ה כִּֽי־חֶרְפָּ֥ה הִ֖וא לָֽנוּ׃

🎵 Listen to leining

Parasha Commentary

Context of the Verse

This verse (Bereshit 34:14) appears in the narrative of Shechem and Dinah, where the sons of Yaakov respond to Shechem and his father Chamor's request to intermarry with their family. The brothers declare their refusal to give their sister Dinah to an uncircumcised man, calling it a "חֶרְפָּה" (reproach). This statement reflects the foundational Jewish value of maintaining kedushah (holiness) and separation from practices contrary to Torah.

Halachic and Moral Implications

Rashi explains that the brothers' refusal was based on the principle that intermarriage with uncircumcised individuals was unacceptable, as circumcision (brit milah) is a fundamental sign of the covenant between Hashem and the Jewish people. The Rambam (Hilchot Melachim 10:8) later codifies this idea, stating that a non-Jew must accept the Seven Noahide Laws and undergo circumcision to marry into the Jewish people.

  • Circumcision as a Covenant: The verse emphasizes that being uncircumcised was not merely a physical state but a spiritual barrier, as brit milah symbolizes dedication to Hashem (Bereshit 17:10-14).
  • Reproach (חֶרְפָּה): The term implies both a moral and communal disgrace. The Midrash (Bereshit Rabbah 80:10) suggests that such a union would undermine the sanctity of Avraham's lineage.

Brothers' Motivation According to Commentators

While the brothers' stance was halachically correct, some commentators debate their sincerity. The Ramban criticizes Shimon and Levi for acting deceitfully and violently afterward, suggesting their primary concern may have been honor rather than pure halachic adherence. However, the Sforno defends their initial refusal as morally justified, as intermarriage would have violated the spiritual integrity of Bnei Yisrael.

Broader Torah Perspective

This verse underscores the Torah's insistence on maintaining Jewish identity and rejecting assimilation. The Talmud (Avodah Zarah 36b) derives from here that intermarriage is prohibited, reinforcing the importance of endogamy within the Jewish people. The principle remains central in Orthodox Judaism today, as codified in Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 16:1).

📚 Talmud Citations

This verse is quoted in the Talmud.

📖 Sanhedrin 82a
The verse is referenced in the discussion about the prohibition of intermarriage with the Canaanites and the importance of circumcision as a distinguishing mark of the Jewish people.

Frequently Asked Questions

Q: Why did Dinah's brothers refuse to let her marry someone uncircumcised?
A: According to Rashi and traditional Jewish sources, Dinah's brothers (Shimon and Levi) refused to let her marry Shechem because he was uncircumcised. Circumcision (brit milah) is a fundamental sign of the covenant between Hashem and the Jewish people (Genesis 17:10-14). Marrying someone who rejected this mitzvah would have been a spiritual and moral compromise, which they saw as a 'reproach' (חֶרְפָּה) to their family's values.
Q: What does 'reproach to us' mean in Genesis 34:14?
A: The term 'reproach' (חֶרְפָּה) in this verse refers to a deep shame or disgrace in the eyes of the family and their values. The Midrash explains that as descendants of Avraham Avinu—who introduced circumcision as a covenant—allowing Dinah to marry an uncircumcised man would betray their sacred tradition and damage their spiritual legacy.
Q: Is circumcision still important in Judaism today based on this verse?
A: Yes, absolutely. The Torah (Genesis 17, Leviticus 12:3) commands circumcision as an eternal covenant. The Rambam (Hilchot Milah) emphasizes its centrality, and the Talmud (Shabbat 130a) states that it is so important that even Shabbat may be desecrated to perform it on the eighth day. Dinah's brothers' refusal highlights that this mitzvah is non-negotiable in Jewish identity and practice.
Q: Why was circumcision such a big deal to Dinah's brothers?
A: Circumcision was not just a physical act but a spiritual commitment. As Rashi explains, Shechem and his people only agreed to circumcise themselves deceitfully (for political gain, not true belief). Shimon and Levi recognized that a marriage without sincere adherence to Torah values would be meaningless. The Talmud (Sanhedrin 59b) teaches that circumcision represents accepting Hashem's commandments, which Shechem's family lacked.