![\"\"](\"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/833\/2023\/02\/pexels-alexander-grey-1146851.jpg\")
In my recent debate with James White on the topic \u201cWhat Is Biblical Marriage?<\/strong><\/em><\/a>\u201d I mentioned that both the Talmud and other ancient Jewish sources recognized 6 different genders, and that Biological Science had confirmed this fact independently.<\/p>\n That didn\u2019t go over very well.<\/p>\n So, here\u2019s a bit more of the research I uncovered while preparing for this debate that shows exactly what I\u2019ve said before: Both scientists and ancient Jewish texts agree that there are 6 different human gender types.<\/p>\n Let\u2019s start with the Ancient Jewish sources since, for most Conservative Evangelical Christians, the Jewish religious sources are likely to be more credible.<\/p>\n Let\u2019s start with the Jewish Mishnah. [The Mishnah is the first major written collection of the Jewish oral traditions that are known as the Oral Torah<\/em>.]\n<\/p> The Mishnah identifies 6 different categories that include the binary \u201cMale\u201d and \u201cFemale\u201d but also 4 other types that fall in between that spectrum.<\/p>\n The Six Categories of Human Gender from Ancient Jewish Sources Are: Nekevah:<\/strong> This term is derived from the word for a crevice and probably refers to a vaginal Androgynos:<\/strong> A person who has both \u201cmale\u201d and \u201cfemale\u201d sexual characteristics. 149 references Tumtum:<\/strong> A person whose sexual characteristics are indeterminate or obscured. 181 references Ay\u2019lonit:<\/strong> A person who is identified as \u201cfemale\u201d at birth but develops \u201cmale\u201d characteristics Saris:<\/strong> A person who is identified as \u201cmale\u201d at birth but develops \u201cfemale\u201d characteristics as [From<\/strong> 6 Terms for Gender Diversity in Classical Jewish Texts by Rabbi Elliot Kukla (2006), PDF linked HERE<\/a>]\n <\/p><\/strong><\/em>Another source \u2013 Patrick Beaulier in his article \u201c\u2018Six Sexes\u201d and Gender Expression<\/strong><\/em><\/a>\u201d \u2013 found that ancient Jewish texts \u2013 including the Mishna, the Talmud and classic Midrash<\/em> \u2013 offered a surprising perspective on human gender and sexuality.<\/p>\n As he says:<\/p>\n \u201cThe halachah<\/em><\/strong> [the collective body of Jewish religious law derived from the Torah] recognizes six or seven sexual identity categories<\/strong>: male, saris (2 types), androgynus, tumtum, aylonit, and female.<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n \u201c[These] \u2018non-binary\u2019 categories weren\u2019t considered exotic or disastrous with midrashim associating them at Adam, Abraham, and Sarah, as well as a midrash giving what sounds like a \u2018trans\u2019 identity for Isaac.<\/strong><\/p>\n \u201cFinally, two halachot illustrate a rabbinic awareness that gender expression follows \u2018local custom,\u2019 i.e. is socially constructed.<\/p>\n \u201cThe rabbinic halachic and midrashic tradition wasn\u2019t liberal in the modern sense with regard to these issues, but it does provide in impetus for a Jewishly rooted mind-opening with regard to sex and gender.\u201d<\/p>\n For greater detail, including quotations from the Jewish Mishneh Torah and Rabbinic commentaries, you can read the entire article HERE><\/a><\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n While it is true that Jewish law is historically based on an assumption of gender duality, (Male and Female), and the fundamental Mishnaic texts indicate that this duality is not conceived symmetrically (as seen through the gendered exemptions of some commandments), the fact remains that, throughout these ancient Jewish texts, there have been numerous references to people who did not fall into that Male\/Female binary category and this required their Rabbis to focus their attention on acknowledging those who did not fall into that convenient binary.<\/p>\n Now, if we REALLY want to get into the weeds on this, it might be helpful to look at this longer quotation from a more in-depth article written by Charlotte Elisheva Fonrobert entitled \u201cGender Identity In Halakhic Discourse<\/a>\u201d where she goes into more detail about the last two categories in our list above \u2013 The Saris<\/strong><\/em> and the Ailonit<\/strong><\/em>:<\/p>\n \u201cTo the rabbis, lack of pubic hair by the age of twenty or eighteen (<\/span>Mishnah\u00a0<\/a>Niddah<\/em><\/a>\u00a05:9<\/a>) indicates an inability to reproduce.<\/strong> On the basis of this evidence, such people are categorized as either\u00a0saris<\/em><\/strong>\u00a0in the male case (usually translated as \u201ceunuch<\/strong>,\u201d but better translated as \u201csterile,\u201d the assumption being that he can in fact have sexual relations,\u00a0Mishnah\u00a0<\/a><\/span>Yevamot<\/em><\/a>\u00a08:4<\/a>), or\u00a0ailonit<\/em><\/strong>\u00a0in the female case, a Hebrew term that the\u00a0Babylonian Talmud<\/span><\/span>\u00a0explains pseudo-etymologically as a \u201cram-like\u201d woman (Ketubbot<\/em>\u00a011a).<\/p>\n \u201cFor the former, the Mishnah and subsequent halakhic literature distinguish between a saris\u00a0h<\/u>amah<\/em><\/strong>, a man who is born with the defect (Tosefta<\/span><\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/em>Yevamot<\/em><\/a>\u00a010:3<\/a>.6, perhaps \u201cfrom the time of seeing the sun,\u201d also described as a man born with only one testicle), and a\u00a0saris adam<\/strong><\/em>, a man who becomes incapable of reproduction by human interference\u00a0(<\/span>Mishnah\u00a0<\/a>Yevamot<\/em><\/a>\u00a08:5\u20136<\/a>), but who was at some point capable of reproduction.<\/p>\n \u201cOther tannaitic traditions (<\/span>Tosefta\u00a0<\/a>Yevamot<\/em><\/a>\u00a010:6<\/a>,\u00a0<\/span>Yevamot<\/em><\/a>\u00a080b<\/a>) include additional \u201csigns\u201d (simanim<\/em>) to infer an incapacity to reproduce, such as lack of beard, the texture of hair and skin, nature of urine and seminal fluid in the male case, lack of breasts and lack of rounded lower abdomen in the female case, and sonority of the voice as an indicator for both, on the assumption that men and women have distinct voices.<\/p>\n \u201cThese signs are also the received wisdom of medical theories deriving from Aristotle (Gleason, 401) and are widespread in late antique culture (Clement, Paedagogus 3.3, Levinson, 129).<\/p>\n \u201cAccording to the rabbinic semiotic system, these signs or their lack would suggest gender uncertainty, since a male body should indeed produce a beard, and a female body should develop breasts. However, the halakhic literature nowhere suggests that the saris<\/em>\u00a0or the\u00a0ailonit<\/em>\u00a0are in fact not \u201creally\u201d man or woman.<\/strong><\/p>\n \u201cImportantly, and in contrast to late ancient physiognomy (see below), the goal of decoding such signs is not to establish or to undermine a mere appearance of genuine masculinity or femininity and to detect a hidden effeminacy, but to infer a potential incapacity to reproduce before marriage is contracted.\u201d<\/p>\n Now, that\u2019s a lot of detail. I know. But when I simply make the claim and provide the basic information on this, many Evangelical Christians cry \u201cWhere\u2019s your proof?\u201d and \u201cWhat evidence do you have?\u201d so this is provided mostly for those in that doubter\u2019s camp.<\/p>\n If you\u2019d like to read the entire article you can do so HERE><\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n BIOLOGICAL SCIENCE<\/strong><\/p>\n Let\u2019s move on to the Scientific data now, shall we?<\/p>\n Here we find that the study of Genetics and Biological research indicates that human beings are best classified into one of 6 different genders.<\/p>\n Well, what do you know? Usually Evangelical Christians are thrilled whenever the Scientific community confirms something from their religious texts. But, in this case, they\u2019re not quite as enthused because it contradicts the assumptions they\u2019ve made about those texts and what they believe they say.<\/p>\n In this article from Scientific American, \u201cSex Redefined: The Idea of 2 Sexes Is Overly Simplistic<\/a>\u201d we learn that Biologists now know that there is a much larger spectrum than simply Male or Female.<\/p>\n As the article begins, Clinical Geneticist Paul James was shocked to discover that one of his patients \u2013 a 46 year old pregnant woman \u2013 was chromosomally male.<\/p>\n
\n<\/strong><\/em>
\nZachar:<\/strong> This term is derived from the word for a pointy sword and refers to a phallus. It is
\nusually translated as \u201cmale\u201d in English.<\/p>\n
\nopening. It is usually translated as \u201cfemale\u201d in English.<\/p>\n
\nin Mishna and Talmud (1st-8th Centuries CE); 350 in classical midrash and Jewish law codes
\n(2nd -16th Centuries CE).<\/p>\n
\nin Mishna and Talmud; 335 in classical midrash and Jewish law codes.<\/p>\n
\nat puberty and is infertile. 80 references in Mishna and Talmud; 40 in classical midrash and
\nJewish law codes.<\/p>\n
\npuberty and\/or is lacking a penis. A saris can be \u201cnaturally\u201d a saris (saris hamah), or become
\none through human intervention (saris adam). 156 references in mishna and Talmud; 379 in
\nclassical midrash and Jewish law codes.<\/p>\n
\nNON-BINARY JEWISH CATEGORIES<\/strong><\/p>\n