Sugya Series
Contemporary Issues of Pidyon Haben
The Mitzvah
1. Sanctify to Me every firstborn, the one who opens the womb… The firstborn of your children you shall redeem…From one month you shall redeem according to the value of five silver shekalim of the holy shekel. (Shemos13:2,13 and Bamidbar 18:16)
2. There is a mitzvah for a man to redeem his son, if the child is a firstborn to his mother, with five silver seloim or their value. Kohanim and leviyim are not included in this obligation. Nor do the daughters of kohanim or leviyim produce a child of this mitzvah.
At the time of the redemption the father says a blessing “Al Pidyon Haben” as well as “shehechiyanu.” Some say to make a meal and recite a blessing on wine at the time of the Pidyon. This is to publicize the event.
(Shulchan Aruch 305:1,3, 18, 10)
The case of an adult
3. If the father did not redeem the child then the child is obligated to redeem himself. Some say that they write on a silver necklace that he is not redeemed yet so that he will know to redeem himself when he becomes Bar Mitzvah. (Shulchan Aruch, Ramoh 305:15)
4. Even though we train a child to do mitzvos by way of education even before bar mitzvah, that is only by mitzvos that can still be done after he is Bar Mitzvah. But by Pidyon, if he does it before Bar Mitzvah he will not be able to do it as an adult. Some say this is the reason that Avraham did not do Milah before he was commanded. (Pischei Teshuvah 305:25)
5. Some say that the community can redeem the child immediately (instead of doing the silver necklace) but I disagree. One cannot do a beneficial act on behalf of a minor if there is any detrimental angle to what you are doing. To take away the child’s mitzvah has an element of detriment to it, and such a beneficial act would not work by a minor. In contrast, if the father was still alive but was not doing the mitzvah, one could give of his own on the father’s behalf to redeem the child. (Taz 305:11)
6. When one redeems himself the text of the blessing is changed to “Al Pidyon HaBichor.” (Ramoh 305:10)
The daughter of a Kohein- who lost it
7. If the mother was the daughter of a Kohein and she lived with a non-Jew then her child is obligated in Pidyon because his mother was violated from Kehunah. (Shulchan Aruch 305:18)
8. In our times it is common to find that a woman may have been with a non-Jew, and if her father was a Kohein, she loses her status of Kehunah through that relationship. Now she may get married and the husband thinks that their firstborn does not require redeption because the mother is the daughter of a Kohein. In reality she does not have the status of Kehuna anymore, and the child needs Pidyon.
This case was presented to me by a woman who is today very observant and is embarrassed to admit to her husband or son that she was at one point with a non-Jew.
If the child would still be before Bar Mitzvah, if she was willing to, I would advise her to tell the husband that she can’t be sure if her boyfriend in college was Jewish, and he should redeem the child because of doubt. Even though he will do so without a Bracha, and according to her information he should be reciting a Bracha, she would not be obligated to tell him the information definitively as she knows it because it would cause her enormous shame.
But the case presented was that the child was already above Bar Mitzvah and the obligation is on the child. She is not prepared to tell the child that there were boyfriends, Jewish or non-Jewish, before his father. What could be done is that someone can grant the necessary money as a gift to the child (without the child knowing) and then use that money to redeem him from a Kohein, as an act that benefits the child. The Pidyon will be affective, and it will be the child’s mitzvah.
Furthermore, I wonder if this might be an opportunity for a person to do the mitzvah of Pidyon Haben even if he does not have a first born son. There are countless people who do not redeem their sons, and one can redeem another adult as an act which is beneficial, even without the person knowing. Yet, we never heard of people pursuing this approach…
(Teshuvos V’hanhagos 4:242)
0 Comments