15.16, etc.). The sources also clearly indicate that this mitzvah is only incumbent upon the male(Tos., Yev. 8), although some later authorities would include women in the obligation, perhaps in a secondary sense(Arukh Hashulkhan, Even Ha-ezer 1.4; Hatam Sofer , Even Ha-ezer,#20). Abraham Hirsh(Noam, vol.16, pp.152ff) has recently discussed the matter of granting a divorce when one spouse has had a transsexual operation. Aside from opposing the operation generally, he also states that no essential biological changes have taken place and that the operation, therefore, was akin to sterilization (which is prohibited) and cosmetic surgery.
Hirsh also mentions a case related to our situation. A male in the time of R. Hananel added an orifice to his body, and R. Hananel decided that a male having intercourse with this individual has committed a homosexual act. This statement is quoted by Ibn Ezra in his commentary on Lev. 18:22. We, however, are not dealing with this kind of situation, but with a complete sexual change operation.
Despite the strong emphasis on procreation, companionship and joy also played a major role in the Jewish concept of marriage. Thus, the seven marriage blessings deal with joy, companionship, the unity of family, restoration of Zion, etc., as well as with children(Ket. 8a). These same blessings were to be recited for those beyond childbearing age, or those who were sterile(Abudarham , Birkhot Erusin 98a).
Most traditional authorities who discussed childless marriages were considering a marriage already in existence(bedi-avad) and not the entrance into such a union. Under such circumstances the marriage would be considered valid and need not result in divorce for the sake of procreation, although that possibility existed(Shulkhan Arukh, Even Ha-ezer 23; see Isserles ’ note on 154.10). This was the only alternative solution, since bigamy was no longer even theoretically
199