Page 48 - EFI-RAV ZILBERSTIN_VOL 8.EFI-RAV ZILBERSTIN_VOL 8.1A

Pg: 48 - 2-Front 21-10-31

gent upon the semen’s ability to fertilize rather, ‘fit to fertilize’ serves
as a means of specifying semen which is emitted without an erection
and without lust which does not confer impurity. This is the same
as we find with terefos: “A living [healthy] animal – eat; a non- viable
animal – do not eat,” where the animal’s health is not the reason it is
permitted but is an indication that it is permitted. So too, semen’s not
being “fit to fertilize” is not the reason for its not conferring impurity
but an indication that it doesn’t do so. Therefore, even if we assume
that nowadays natures have changed and even semen which is emit-
ted without sensation can fertilize, it will still not confer the impurity
of shichvas zera because the impurity is not contingent on the semen’s
qualitative ability to fertilize, but upon its emission with erection
and lust. Looking at it the other way, it is also possible that semen
which cannot fertilize nowadays because of lack of vitamins or for
some other medical reason but that is [nevertheless] ejaculated with
erection and lust will confer impurity, for neither the gemara nor the
Rambam state otherwise. Such conditions may not have existed in
those times, or if they did they may have been remediable.

The Rambam’s omission of Shmuel’s reason is now understand-
able for it makes no practical difference whether or not the sperm
is qualitatively able to fertilize, since the main and sole determinant
is whether it was emitted with an erection and lust, in which case it
confers impurity or without in which case it does not.

This does away with the second objection that we raised for even
if we assume that nowadays natures have changed and even semen
emitted without sensation is capable of fertilizing, it will still not con-
fer impurity and there may therefore be no prohibition of emitting
semen for naught, as we wrote above.

This argument for permitting it is only applicable according to
the view of the Achiezer, that the prohibition of emitting semen for
naught is derived from the passuk, “Guard yourselves from any evil
thing,” but not according to those in whose opinion it is derived from
the prohibition of wasting, that it is halachah brought down from
Moshe at Sinai, or that it is a nullification of the mitzvah of procre-
ation.

32 1 Medical-Halachic Responsa of Rav Zilberstein