An experience that no one can withstand

This throws the ground under almost all seed laws into disuse.

And in honor of the rabbinic feast of Elul, I will write

Maybe the prohibition is only for the purpose of corrupting the seed, like being awake and masturbating, and not just for pleasure, which is not forbidden?
And maybe it is even more limited to only having sex inside and ejaculating outside with his wife, just like being awake and masturbating, and in other ways that are not forbidden?
In any case, the commentators of the commandments did not bring this prohibition
Which means that it is probably a rabbinic.
And maybe, like many rabbis, it does not apply
In place of sorrow/illness/great loss, etc.

1. It is not necessary to interpret that according to Rabbi Ilai, that person does not have a free choice to stand trial. It can be explained that if a person has already freely chosen to commit a certain sin, even then he should not completely unburden himself, but rather he should refrain from doing so in a way that would publicly blaspheme.

2. Regarding sources for why God does not put someone who cannot stand trial to trial, see: https://forum.otzar.org/viewtopic.php?t=22363

3. It should be noted that the concept of “trial” in the words of the Sages is much broader than the limited meaning of the difficulty involved in keeping a mitzvot in certain circumstances.

4. And for the group of those who disagree, if the mitzvot counters did not bring this about, it may not be because of the status of the law but because of the rules of the minyan of mitzvot. For example, if it is a private law of a more comprehensive mitzvot.
Whereas the limiting premises you proposed require substantiation, it is not enough to simply blurt out "maybe" or "maybe".

1. It is not necessary, but this is the simple interpretation. And this is also evident from the words of the Rif and the Raash in the Mok there, who reject this as a matter of law, claiming that everything is in the hands of God except for the Lord. And this is not mentioned in other poskim (Tosho and Rambam).
Your suggestion is unnecessary. And should someone who ate garlic and its smell waft away eat more garlic?!
2. I did not see any source there. Except for a few Hasidim who decided so.
4. When making suggestions, there is no need to substantiate them. If the prohibition is lighter, one can argue that they permitted it under different circumstances. This is how the poskim have always acted.

This is most likely the source:
Corinthians 10:13
There hath no temptation taken hold of you but such as is common to man. But God is faithful; He will not suffer you to be tempted beyond that which you are able to bear, but with the temptation will also make a way to escape, that you may be able to bear it.

🙂
I dealt with this in discussions about homosexuality. See, for example, column 728. R.M. Feinstein assumes this without any basis in my opinion, and I leveraged his words in a surprising direction.