Bechoros - Daf 47
- A gentile who had children before converting (re: bechor and פריה ורביה)
Amoraim discuss someone who fathered children as a gentile and later converted. Rebbe Yochanan says אין לו בכור לנחלה – he cannot have a bechor regarding inheritance, i.e., the first son he fathers as a Jew will not receive a double portion. He holds that the child he fathered as a gentile is ראשית אונו – the first of his strength, so his first son as a Jew is not. Reish Lakish says he can have a bechor regarding inheritance, because גר שנתגייר כקטן שנולד דמי – a convert who converts is like a newborn baby, and his previous children are not considered his. Thus, his first child as a Jew is a bechor. They followed their respective opinions regarding the mitzvah of פריה ורביה – procreation: if one fathered children as a gentile and converted, Rebbe Yochanan says he has fulfilled the mitzvah of פריה ורביה, because the passuk says לא תוהו בראה לשבת יצרה – He did not create [the world] to remain empty; He formed it to be inhabited. Since he helped populate the world (albeit with gentiles), he has fulfilled פריה ורביה. Reish Lakish holds he has not fulfilled פריה ורביה, because גר שנתגייר כקטן שנולד דמי, and his children are not related to him. The Gemara explains the need for both arguments.
- The child of a לויה is exempt from פדיון הבן
Rav Ada bar Ahavah said: לוייה שילדה בנה פטור מה' סלעים – if a Leviah [a Levi’s daughter] gave birth, her son is exempt from the five selaim of פדיון הבן. This cannot be where she conceived from a Kohen or Levi, because the son would be exempt even if the mother was a ישראלית. If she conceived from a Yisroel, the child’s lineage follows the father, as the passuk says: למשפחותם לבית אבותם – by their families, according to their fathers’ house. As such, the son should be obligated in פדיון הבן!? Rav Pappa explains the case is where she conceived from an idolator. Since he does not follow the father’s lineage, he follows his mother’s, and as the child of a Leviah is exempt from פדיון הבן. This holds true even according to the opinion that he is disqualified from marrying ordinary Jews, and his father’s lineage is taken into account. Still, לוי פסול מיקרי – he is called “a disqualified Levi.” Rava says the case is where she conceived from a Yisroel. Since פדיון הבן depends on פטר רחם – one that opens the womb, this child, though a Yisroel, is exempt, because he “opened the womb” of a Leviah.
- Is a חלל whose Kohen father died obligated in פדיון הבן?
Amoraim discuss: כהן שמת והניח בן חלל – if a Kohen died and left a firstborn son who is a חלל (and is not a Kohen), Rav Chisda says the son is obligated to redeem himself, but Rabbah bar Rav Huna says he is not. The Gemara clarifies that if the father died after thirty days from the son’s birth, and the פדיון הבן obligation took effect during the father’s lifetime, all agree the son is exempt from redeeming himself, שהרי זכה אביו בפדיונו – because the father already acquired his redemption [money], since he could have merely separated the money and kept it (as a Kohen). They argue where the father died during the thirty days after his birth (before the mitzvah came into effect). Rav Chisda holds the son must redeem himself, since the father never acquired the redemption money. Rabbah bar Rav Huna holds he is exempt, because he can tell any Kohen: אתינא מכח גברא דלא מצית לאשתעויי דינא בהדיה – I come from the strength of a man with whom you could not litigate (since his father could have separated and kept the five סלעים).
