Micropigmentation and Permanent Makeup

(11) The etched-in writing against which it is spoken of in the Torah is, not to make an incision in one's flesh and fill in the incision with paint, or ink, or any other dyes which enface. This was an idolatrous custom, to make themselves to idolatry, proclamatory that every one of them is a sold slave to it, and indentured in its service. And, from the moment one will enface with any kind of dye which enfaces, after making an incision in any place of the body, whether it be done by man or by woman, he or she, is striped. If one wrote but did not enface with dye, or if he did enface with dye but did not write in the incision, he is not guilty; for he must do both, write by incision and etch-in with dye, even as it is said: "And any etched-in writing shall you not fix on yourselves" (Lev. 19. 28). This is to say against the one who does the writing, but he who upon whose flesh the etched-in writing was done is not guilty save if he assisted in a manner to constitute it an overt act; but if he contributed nothing to the work itself he is not striped.¹⁴Makkot, 21b; Sifre, Lev. Ch. 19. C. G.

(4) One who marks his slave lest he escape is exempt (But it seems that, in the first place, it is forbidden).

(1) That we not imprint an imprinted tatoo into our flesh: To not imprint an imprinted tatoo into our flesh, as it is stated (Leviticus 19:28), "and an imprinted tattoo you shall not put into your flesh." And the content is like that which the Yishmaelites do today, as they imprint an imprint that is inscribed and stuck into their flesh, such that it is never erased. And the liability is only with an imprint that is inscribed and impressed with ink or blue dye or with other colors that make an impression. And so did they say in Makkot 21a, "[If] he tattooed, but did not imprint" - meaning to say, he did not make an impression with color - "[if] he imprinted, but did not tattoo" - meaning to say that he did make an impression [on] his flesh with a color, but he did not make a marking in his flesh - " he is not liable, until he imprints, and tattoos with ink, or with blue dye or with anything that makes an impression."

(2) That which we wrote on encircling the head and destroying the beard, which is to distance all matters of idolatry from our bodies and from between our eyes, is from the roots of the commandment. And this too is from this very root, as it was the custom of the [other] nations to make an impression upon themselves for their idolatry - meaning to say that he is a slave sold to it and marked for its service.

(3) From the laws of the commandment is that which they, may their memory be blessed, said (Mishneh Torah, Laws of Foreign Worship and Customs of the Nations 12:11) that every place on the body - whether it is revealed, or whether it is covered by clothes - is included in this prohibition. And the rest of its details are at the end of Tractate Makkot.

(4) And [it] is practiced in every place and at all times by males and females. And one who transgresses it and writes even one letter on any place of his body in the manner that we have said - that it be inscribed and generate an impression with one of the colors that make an impression - is lashed. But if others made an impression upon him, he is not lashed unless he assisted - due to the well-known principle [that] we do not administer lashes for a negative commandment that does not have an act [involved] with it.