update:
Rav Yigal Shafran (Techumin #21):
פוסקי דורנו נחלקו בשאלה האם יש השלכות הלכתיות
לניתוח לשינוי המין' ומה הן השלכות אלו, כגון : האם מי שעשה כן חייב לברך "שעשני
כרצונו", או "שלא עשני אשה"? האם פוקעים מגבר מצוות שחייב בהם, והאם
פוקעות מנשים מצוות שרק הן חייבות בהך?
הרב עובדיה חדאיה זצ"ל (שו"ת ישכיל-עבדי
ח"ז אה"ע סי' ד) סבר שאין לניתוח כזה משמעויות של שינוי, וכל אחד נשאר במינו.
כשיטה זו סברו עוד הרבה, למשל :הרב חירש ב 'נועם' חט"ז (תשל"ג) עמ' קנב
(שו"ת לב-אריה ח"ב סי' מט ; בקובץ אסיא ח ' וא עמ' 144, נשמת-אברהם א"ע סי מד אות ג,
ועוד .
אכן הרב וולדנברג בשו"ת ציץ-אליעזר (חי"א
סי' עח) סובר שיש מצבים בהם ניתן לשנות את המין, וכוונתו לתינוק שנולד עם סימנים כפולים,
ואם יתערבו ויבטלו בניתוח את אותם חלקים של סימני זכרות שעימם נולד - יועיל הדבר לתחשיבו
כנקנה. על סמך דבריו יש שטעו לקבוע באופן גורף שמינו של אדם נקבע על סמך מראהו החיצוני
(ודבריהם הובאו באנציקלופדיה רפואית הלכתית, בסוף הערך 'ניתוחים' ח"ד עמ' 611 הע' 78 ).
אולם דומני שדיוק זה אינו נכון, והרב
וולדנברג שליט"א כלל לא דיבר במי שהחליט מיוזמתו להפוך את מינו. סימוכיך לכך ניתן
למצוא בתשובה נוספת של הרב רולדנברג שליט"א (ציץ-אליעזר חכ"ב סי' ב) בפנייתו
אל הראשל"צ הרב מרדכי אליהו שליט"א בעניו דומה. שם העלה, שגם מי שהתחלף מינו
מנקבה לזכר בדרך נס, דינו כאנדרוגינוס ולא כזכר, וזאת למרות מראהו החיצוני.
מסתבר שגם במקרה שתואר בראשית דברינו, גם הרב וולדנברג יודה שאין להחשיב את
הגברת הזו לגבר כלל ועיקר ,שכן בתשובה בחי"א הנ"ל הוא עצמו דיבר רק על מצב המבוסס על
הכפילות שתיתה בסימני הילד כשנולד, ומשום שמדובר היה בתינוק. אבל בבוגרת שהחליטה לעשות
מעשה ולחבול באבריה - על מנת לתחשיבה אחר כך כזכר, ושתיטול הורמונים זיכויים - לא מצינו
מי שיקל בזה, ובטוחני שגם הרב וולדנברג שליט"א היה מורה בזה לאיסור מוחלט ,ושלא כדברי מי שהבין בדבריו ההיפך , כנ"ל.
Arutz 7 The Jerusalem Rabbinate was forced this week to announce the nullification of a marriage it had performed, when it became clear that the groom was actually a transgender man, thus making the marriage invalid according to Jewish law.
The saga began when the couple approached the Rabbinate to register for marriage. The Rabbinate saw that the woman was pregnant, and the man claimed the fetus was his child.
Approval for the marriage was then granted.
The couple request a modest wedding ceremony to be held at the Rabbinate's office, and the Rabbinate complied with the request. The ceremony took place and one of the rabbis on the Religious Council officiated.
However, two weeks later, the Rabbinate received information that the
man married had not actually been born a man, and was previously a
woman who had sex reassignment surgery in 2013.[...]
update - see Tzitz Eliezar who holds that sex change operations change the halachic gender
Tzitz Eliezar(10:25.26):
See Rabbi J. Wiesen's discussion
update - see Tzitz Eliezar who holds that sex change operations change the halachic gender
Tzitz Eliezar(10:25.26):
See Rabbi J. Wiesen's discussion
There was nothing to annul. A sham marriage never had any halachic effect in the first place, even if the two women went through the ritual halachic marriage procedures.
ReplyDeleteDon't you need a 'teudat zehut' (israeli id card) to get married? I guess they overlooked checking that box.
ReplyDelete@Moe see teshuva of Tzitz Eliezer - he says gender changes with a sex change operation
ReplyDeletehttp://daattorah.blogspot.co.il/2013/01/tzitz-eliezar-sex-change-by-surgery.html
@Mimedinat HaYam - the Israeli goverment might recognize gender change - and change it on the ID card
ReplyDeleteNot only are you correct, the article actually says they used the 'marriage' to change the teudat zehut / id card.
ReplyDeleteIf that Tzitz is accepted in this case then the marriage would have been a valid one, no?
ReplyDeleteInterestingly, the tzitz eliezer only discusses a woman becoming a man, and whether he can receive a get from the (former) spouse, and says can't cause the get says a man gives a get to his wife / woman, and that would be a lie (and the get says she is pemitted to any man, which is also not true.) Of course, a get should be done before the operations and before hormone treatments.
ReplyDeleteSo in effect, such a man or woman is an agunah of his / her own doing.
I once asked a friend, a minor dayan on the BDA, what is to prevent a wife (or a husband) from bringing a man, claims he's her husband, and do a get?
ReplyDeleteHe told me they both have to bring id, preferably photo id, but he admitted they're not too strict about it.
Well, i told him, its not too difficult for a person to go to local DMV, claim a driver's license is lost, and get a duplicate license using alternate id. After all, spouse can always 'borrow' a birth certificate or old passport for a day, and DMV is none the wiser. And if he or she does not use it for (civil) fraudulent purposes, not too illegal.
The dayan admitted its entirely possible.
if ta sex change effects a gender change on what grounds was the annulment issued?
ReplyDeleteAn FBI agent was able to convince the BDA to issue a Siruv against her "husband" -- who didn't even exist -- for not giving her a Get.
ReplyDeleteI heard a certain Talmid Chacham criticising Rabbi J. David Bleich שליט"א for even quoting that Tzitz Eliezer in his Sefer! (I won't say what he said...)
ReplyDeleteBy the way, regarding the status of a woman who is married to a man who then "becomes a woman" (!), see Teshuvos Lev Aryeh (Grossnass), Chelek 2 Siman 49.
Good Shabbos to all
So my above point, I believe, remains valid. The sham marriage needed no annulment. It was null and void and without ever any effect. Presuming we don't accept this Tzitz as authoritative for transgenders, as seemingly the majority of the halachic world doesn't accept this Tzitz.
ReplyDeleteIf one does accept this Tzitz as authoritative, then the marriage should have been valid and there was no reason to annul it after-the-fact.
was that Talmid Hacham as well known as the Tzitz Eliezer?
ReplyDeleteQuoting it is one thing, agreeing with it is quite another.
1) Er, no.
ReplyDelete2) That's that I said! But the TC said that to cite something ridiculous without identifying it as such is evidence that the author "has to go back to Kollel".
1. What topic did R. Bleich quote the Tzitz Eliezer on?
ReplyDelete2. Why did this other rabbi criticize him for quoting him?
3. Is this other rabbi who did the ctiticizing prominent?
so my next question is whether the TC is as great and respected as R' Bleich.? Since there are not many people, certainly in the English speaking world, with the same stature as R' Bleich, ....
ReplyDelete1. Sex-change operations, of course!
ReplyDelete2. Because he felt that the position is so ridiculous that it does not belong in a Sefer.
3. Nope.
3. says it all.
ReplyDeleteThe answer, again, has to be no. I am not claiming that the statement has validity because of the TC's authority. It is rather a case of קבל האמת ממי שאמרה. My own opinion is that RB should have highlighted how strange the TI's opinion is.
ReplyDeleteEddie - you are contradicting your long-held belief (based on Rambam) that קבל האמת ממי שאמרה. What's going on - has your screen name been hijacked by a Chareidi?!
ReplyDeleteI might be in agreement with you, at least in as far as this is an odd opinion, but even when we see it posted here, it is simply cited as the view of the Tzitz Eliezer, and not that it is unworthy of being mentioned.
ReplyDeleteThe problem I have with the statement is not that is rejects that particular teshuva, but that it speaks in a condescending manner about one of the Gedolei Torah, to go back to kollel!
Very Good. I do accept this Rambam. I even agree that the Tzitz in this particular Teshuva is an "outlier", but I am not qualified to discuss such a complex issue. My only point is that I wouldn't (at least not anymore) tell a Gadol to go back to Kollel, even if I disagreed. But I am sure R Bleich had good reason to mention an opinion, (which he does not agree with), and that is not a bad thing, as we learn that the Mishna also mentions minority opinions, even though they are not halacha.
ReplyDeleteWe do find precedent for such language, when a TC feels strongly about a position,e.g. in the Gemara "Rav was sleeping deeply when he said this!"
ReplyDeleteOK, so let him say it about the source.
ReplyDeleteWhy the fascination with this topic? Strange things will always happen.
ReplyDeleteAren't cases of where homosexual Frum men marry naive Frum women (often on the advice of a Rov to be mekayeim Piryeh VeRivyeh, and not to divulge their homsexual orientations and preferences) and then the Frum women either finds out the truth, or the guy walks out on her and comes out of the closet. Aren't those cases more common and more shocking, than the one in a million chance of a "tum-tum" or "andriginus" getting married to someone "normal" -- and it is conceivable to think that is some cases in may quite humanly be possible that the other party does not totally freak out and may even come to terms with who they married simply because they either love them, or they may have had no other way to find some sort of home or security.
Strange things will always happened, but that should never effect the norms and averages that Halacha is premised upon. This mots is interesting but it's about freak situation. What would be even more worrisome is when fake Geirim pretend to go through a proper "conversion" but really are not interested in Yiddishkeit at all, and just want to marry the Jewish spouse. That is a far more explosive and potentially common scenario to zero in on.
Well, I'm not going to hypothesise about whether he would do that or not.
ReplyDeleteI hear another Talmid Chochom saying that this Teshuva of the Tzitz Eliezer was "pure Rishus".
ReplyDelete"Rishus"?
ReplyDeleteSuch a thing is Ossur to say about the Psak of any Talmid Chacham, especially one of the Gedolim.
So wouldn't an allegation of implied am artzus also be assur?
ReplyDeleteThere was no "allegation".It was more a statement as to the absurdity of the Psak, the likes of which can be found in the thousands in Rabbinic literature (starting in the Gemara). Calling someone (who is not a Rasha) a Rasha is another thing entirely.
ReplyDeleteThe Talmid Chochom who says this is a Gadol himself. He can certainly say this on another Gadol.
ReplyDeleteWell, if you give me a recording of someone who I regard a Gadol making such a statement, I would perhaps have to rethink my conception of how a Gadol should speak. Until then, I believe that it is irresponsible and non-Torahdik to speak in such a way, and that anybody who does so - barring overwhelming evidence to the contrary - definitely forfeits the title "Gadol".
ReplyDelete