Page 488 - EFI-RAV ZILBERSTIN_VOL 8.EFI-RAV ZILBERSTIN_VOL 8.1A

Pg: 488 - 16-Front 21-10-31

suffer financial loss in a situation where the other person is bringing
the sin upon himself and is forcing him with threats to extend the for-
bidden object to him. Here too, the physician is under no obligation
to lose his position because of a sinful woman who is forcing him to
treat her2.

We still need to consider the fact that then physician will be caus-
ing mamzerim to proliferate among the Jewish people, which is a mis-
fortune for the Jewish nation even without considering the woman’s
sin. Perhaps this constitutes grounds for forbidding him to treat her
[even if it costs him his position]? It appears though that “something
crooked that cannot be straightened” doesn’t apply to the physician.
This is because Rashi (Chagigah, ibid) explains that having inces-
tuous relations is considered “something crooked which cannot be
straightened” “because he has brought individuals of tainted lineage
[mamzerim] into Yisrael and there will be a lasting remnant of his sin.
Therefore, his sins cannot be erased with repentance.” [Tosfos (ibid.
s.v zeh) write similarly: “The disgrace of a person who has incestuous
relations is apparent, for the mamzer is visible to everyone, whereas
with other sins like murder and stealing, the witness to his sin is not
in front of him.] This situation’s heightened severity thus lies in the
fact that the sin cannot be erased by repentance. In our case, where
the physician is not the sinner but with his treatment is only enabling
the adulterers to bring mamzerim into the world, he does not have to
lose his position on their account.



All the above applies in the case of a Jewish woman. We shall now
discuss the case of a non-Jewish woman, as cited in question one.

It first needs to be clarified whether the status of mamzerus exists
when a married non Jewish woman commits adultery. The Shulchan
Aruch writes (Even Ha’ezer 4:21), “If a non Jew had relations with
his mother and sired a son from her who is a mamzer and the son

2. See our lengthy discussion of he Maharil Diskin’s comments, earlier, siman 286,
‘We shall now discuss the second part of the question.’

472 1 Medical-Halachic Responsa of Rav Zilberstein