The Smiths converted to Judaism when they were middle-aged. Mr. Smith had a 15-year-old son, Tommy, from a prior marriage, who chose not to convert, whereas Mrs. Smith had no children of her own.
After the conversion, Mr. and Mrs. Smith changed their family name to Simon, and remarried with a Jewish ceremony of chuppah and kiddushin.
A year later, Mrs. Simon gave birth to a set of twin boys, whom they named Moshe and Aharon. They celebrated the brissim with great joy, appreciative of the privilege to be a part of Am Yisrael.
After the brissim, Mrs. Simon said to her husband, “I know that there is an additional ceremony of redeeming the firstborn son. Do we need to do this for Moshe, since he’s our firstborn Jewish son?”
“I’m not sure about that,” replied Mr. Simon, “considering that I have an older son, Tommy, although he chose not to convert.”
“Still, Moshe is our firstborn Jewish son,” said Mrs. Simon.
“If you’re raising that question,” mused Mr. Simon, “I have a similar question.”
“What is that?” asked Mrs. Simon.
“We learned that the firstborn son inherits a double portion,” answered Mr. Simon. “What happens in our case, where I have a prior child, Tommy, who didn’t convert?”
“I suppose the answer would be the same for both questions,” continued Mr. Simon. “If we consider Tommy, then there should be no pidyon haben and Moshe would not be entitled to a double portion. If we don’t consider Tommy, then Moshe – our first Jewish child – should need a pidyon haben and would be entitled to a double portion.”
“I’m hoping we have many healthy years together until the issue of inheritance becomes relevant,” laughed Mrs. Simon. “Anyway, we will likely write a will, so that this issue may not be relevant. However, pidyon haben is only three weeks off, so I’d like you to verify.”
Mr. Simon called Rabbi Dayan and asked, “Does Moshe need a pidyon haben? And is he entitled to a double portion?”
“Indeed, the Torah requires redeeming the firstborn son (bechor), and also entitles him to a double portion in his father’s estate, but not in his mother’s,” replied Rabbi Dayan (Y.D. 305:1; C.M. 277:1).
“However, there are several differences between these halachos. Bechor of pidyon haben relates to the firstborn of the mother, who was her peter rechem, whereas bechor of inheritance relates to the firstborn viable child of the father.
Thus, if a woman without children has a son from a second marriage to a man who has prior children, the boy is a bechor for pidyon haben, but is not a bechor for inheritance. Conversely, if a woman with children has a son from a second marriage to a man who does not have prior children, the boy is not a bechor for pidyon haben, but is a bechor for inheritance (Y.D. 305:17; C.M, 277:8).
Furthermore, if the mother had a miscarriage, the firstborn son does not require pidyon haben, because he is not her peter rechem, but is considered a bechor regarding his father’s inheritance, because the miscarriage did not come to be a viable child (Y.D. 305:22; 305:6).
When a gentile couple with joint children converted, and had a son after the conversion, he is not a bechor even for inheritance (even if the children did not convert), because also a gentile’s children are halachically associated to their father (Y.D. 305:20-21; C.M. 277:9; Aruch HaShulchan 277:7).
Thus, in your case, Moshe is considered a bechor for pidyon haben, because Mrs. Simon has no former children, but he is not considered a bechor for inheritance, because Mr. Simon has Tommy.
“However, if a couple was, unfortunately, intermarried, whether a Jewish man with a gentile woman or a gentile man with a Jewish woman, the children are not halachically associated with the father,” concluded Rabbi Dayan. “Therefore, if a boy was born after the gentile party converted, he will be a bechor for inheritance, because he is the first son associated with the father, but not for pidyon haben (Nesivos 277:1).”
Verdict: Bechor regarding pidyon haben depends on the mother; bechor regarding inheritance depends on the father. Children of intermarriage are not associated with their father, but if a gentile couple had children before their conversion, those children are associated with the father, so that the first child after conversion is not a bechor.
To receive BHI’s free newsletter, Business Weekly, send an e-mail to [email protected].
This article is intended for learning purposes and cannot be used for final halachic decision. There are also issues of dina d’malchusa to consider in actual cases.
