Contraception in Contemporary Orthodox Judaism
Contraception in Contemporary Orthodox Judaism Contraception in Contemporary Orthodox Judaism
In summation, Rabbenu Tam certainly held that there is no debate between Rabbi Meir and the Sages about whether or not a moch is permitted. The moch before intercourse may be prohibited, though the problem may be related to spilled seed or it may be merely a delay of procreation. Then again, there may be no problem with a moch before intercourse at all. After intercourse, there is certainly no problem at all, for either the man or the woman, according to both Rabbi Meir and the Sages. Rambam The most noticeable feature of the Rambam’s view of the moch issue is that he did not mention it at all in the entire Mishna Torah. He explicitly forbade spilling seed, though it is not clear what the nature of the prohibition is 22 . One looks in vain for a problem associated with the moch. The simplest explanation for this glaring omission is that Rambam agreed with Rabbenu Tam that there is no prohibition whatsoever, only a recommendation by Rabbi Meir to use the moch under certain situations. The Sages disagreed, so there is nothing to write. However, the situation is a little more complicated than that. First, Rambam does write that one of the implications of the prohibition of spilled seed is that a man should not marry a minor who is not capable of bearing children. In paragraph 26 of the same chapter, he wrote that a man should not marry any other infertile woman. Complicating matters, he wrote elsewhere (Hilchos Ishus 15:7) that a man should not marry a woman incapable of bearing children unless he has already fulfilled the mitzvah of procreation or has another wife through whom he could fulfill the mitzvah. At first glance, there seems to be a blatant contradiction – if marrying an infertile woman 22Hilchos Issurei Biyah 21:18
is a violation of spilled seed, how could it be permitted under a situation in which procreation is not an issue. There is a simple answer to this question. As was mentioned above in the discussion about the Sefer Hayashar - some ramifications of spilling seed may really be side problems associated with delaying the mitzvah of procreation. Marrying an infertile woman may indeed be a problem that is related to spilled seed, but only if the man involved has not fulfilled his obligation of procreation. Under those circumstances, he would be shirking his responsibility and wasting his procreative potential. If he has already fulfilled the mitzvah, he can no longer be held guilty of delay, so he is permitted to marry her. A second solution relies on another halacha of Rambam 23 stating that although a man could do whatever sexual activities he desires with his wife, ‘middas chasidus’ suggests that he should refrain from anything that veers from what is natural since ‘this matter is only for procreation’. Perhaps Rambam considers all intercourse that cannot result in procreation to be somewhat problematic – a version of spilling seed for those who conduct themselves according to ‘middas chasidus’. 24 Thus, intercourse with a woman incapable of bearing children may be permitted if procreation is not an issue, but it is still not middas chasidus. Rosh Rabbenu Asher, better known by his acronym, Rosh, is probably the most difficult of the Rishonim to clarify with certainty. His primary work in halacha, classically known as simply ‘the Rosh’, merely copied the original Tosefta as it is written in the Talmud. However, he also wrote the Tosefos HaRosh, a version of the analyses of the Ba’alei 23 Hilchos Isurei Biyah 21:9 24 See Birchei Yosef, Even Haezer 23:1, who gives this as his final answer to the contradiction in Rambam.
- Page 1 and 2: Contraception in Contemporary Ortho
- Page 3 and 4: abbinic clarification like most oth
- Page 5 and 6: in that chapter (15:7), he writes t
- Page 7 and 8: guilt of one who is not ‘involved
- Page 9 and 10: Contraception has a fascinating his
- Page 11 and 12: leniency was precisely the sin of E
- Page 13 and 14: 5) Why should the Sages disallow th
- Page 15 and 16: specified by Rabbi Meir are all bor
- Page 17: Three women use the moch. The expla
- Page 21 and 22: anatomy of the woman forced the man
- Page 23 and 24: following the severe warnings given
- Page 25 and 26: and covers almost all aspects of th
- Page 27 and 28: have considerably changed the playi
- Page 29 and 30: obviously suffers from none of the
- Page 31 and 32: Jewish continuity that went beyond
- Page 33 and 34: category of things that are permitt
- Page 35 and 36: One important point should be noted
- Page 37 and 38: Perhaps the appropriate approach fo
- Page 39 and 40: Perhaps the modern issue of contrac
- Page 41 and 42: However, not everyone shares the sa
- Page 43 and 44: hardly raising an eyebrow. Parallel
is a violation of spilled seed, how could it be permitted under a<br />
situation <strong>in</strong> which procreation is not an issue.<br />
There is a simple answer to this question. As was mentioned above <strong>in</strong><br />
the discussion about the Sefer Hayashar - some ramifications of<br />
spill<strong>in</strong>g seed may really be side problems associated with delay<strong>in</strong>g the<br />
mitzvah of procreation. Marry<strong>in</strong>g an <strong>in</strong>fertile woman may <strong>in</strong>deed be a<br />
problem that is related to spilled seed, but only if the man <strong>in</strong>volved<br />
has not fulfilled his obligation of procreation. Under those<br />
circumstances, he would be shirk<strong>in</strong>g his responsibility and wast<strong>in</strong>g his<br />
procreative potential. If he has already fulfilled the mitzvah, he can<br />
no longer be held guilty of delay, so he is permitted to marry her.<br />
A second solution relies on another halacha of Rambam 23 stat<strong>in</strong>g that<br />
although a man could do whatever sexual activities he desires with his<br />
wife, ‘middas chasidus’ suggests that he should refra<strong>in</strong> from anyth<strong>in</strong>g<br />
that veers from what is natural s<strong>in</strong>ce ‘this matter is only for<br />
procreation’. Perhaps Rambam considers all <strong>in</strong>tercourse that cannot<br />
result <strong>in</strong> procreation to be somewhat problematic – a version of<br />
spill<strong>in</strong>g seed for those who conduct themselves accord<strong>in</strong>g to ‘middas<br />
chasidus’. 24 Thus, <strong>in</strong>tercourse with a woman <strong>in</strong>capable of bear<strong>in</strong>g<br />
children may be permitted if procreation is not an issue, but it is still<br />
not middas chasidus.<br />
Rosh<br />
Rabbenu Asher, better known by his acronym, Rosh, is probably the<br />
most difficult of the Rishonim to clarify with certa<strong>in</strong>ty. His primary<br />
work <strong>in</strong> halacha, classically known as simply ‘the Rosh’, merely copied<br />
the orig<strong>in</strong>al Tosefta as it is written <strong>in</strong> the Talmud. However, he also<br />
wrote the Tosefos HaRosh, a version of the analyses of the Ba’alei<br />
23 Hilchos Isurei Biyah 21:9<br />
24 See Birchei Yosef, Even Haezer 23:1, who gives this as his f<strong>in</strong>al answer to the contradiction <strong>in</strong><br />
Rambam.
Change language