Page 78 - EFI-RAV ZILBERSTIN_VOL 8.EFI-RAV ZILBERSTIN_VOL 8.1A

Pg: 78 - 3-Back 21-10-31

Tzion 137) writes that a person who emits semen violates the prohibi-
tion against wasting or destroying. (Vayikra 19:27).

From all of the above, we understand that semen should not be
extracted from the husband even for the purpose of fertilizing his
wife, because it is known that in order to increase the chances of suc-
cessful fertilization semen must be extracted many times, with only
part of it being used for fertilization with the rest going to waste.
Who permitted this?!

Although we find in maseches Yevamos (76a) that for the purpose
of testing – in order to clarify whether a man is a kerus shufchah [i.e.
his male organ is perforated] – a stratagem is employed [warm barley
bread is brought and placed on his anus] to induce the emission of
semen, the Yam Shel Shlomo writes (16) that this only permitted in
an indirect manner but not to induce emission manually. Even this
is only permitted because if we don’t allow him to induce an indi-
rect emission he will be unable to marry because he may be a kerus
shufchah but on the other hand he may not be a kerus shufchah, in
which case he neglects fulfilling the mitzvah of procreation and will
constantly be subject to impure thoughts which lead to his becoming
impure and “it is better that Shabbos be desecrated this once”…etc.1
However, no leniency can be derived from this for emitting semen for
fertilization and artificial insemination.

The Divrei Malkiel (Vol. 4 107-108) prohibits artificial insemina-
tion because when the semen is emitted it is for naught [i.e. fertiliza-
tion is not immediate]. Furthermore, it may later turn out that they
are unable to fertilize the woman, resulting in the emission’s having
been for naught. The response Yaskil Avdi concurs. (Vol. 5, Even
Ha’ezer 10)

Many of the poskim rule that the husband does not fulfill the
mitzvah of procreation by artificial insemination since the child is not
considered his offspring. (See Chelkas Mechokek 1,8) As a result, he
violates the prohibition of wasting semen. (Divrei Malkiel ibid.)

1. This passage of gemara is discussed at length, according to several different
approaches, earlier in siman 251.

62 1 Medical-Halachic Responsa of Rav Zilberstein