Halakhah sa Mga Bilang 18:16: Shulchan Arukh, Yoreh De'ah & Sefer HaChinukh

For an infant throughout the entire thirty days [after birth]⁵⁰Shab. 135b in accord with R. Simeon b. Gamaliel who derives this from the verse, ‘And those that are to be redeemed of them from a month old shalt thou redeem’ (Num. XVIII, 16). This shows that since he is redeemed only after the thirty days are completely over, it follows that only then is the infant regarded as a viable birth, but not before. including the thirtieth day⁵¹Bek. 29a in accord with R. Ashi. An infant who died on the thirty-first day after birth prior to the twenty-four hours from the hour of birth, is mourned for — P.Tesh. [who died], one does not observe mourning rites, even if its hair and nails were fully developed;⁵²The case in question is where we are not certain whether the months of pregnancy were complete, although the infant’s hair and nails were fully developed contra Hag. Asheri and BaḤ who maintain that this ruling is applicable only in the case of an infant whose hair and nails were not fully developed — ShaK. and thenceforth one mourns for it unless it was known that it was [born after] eight months [of pregnancy].⁵³In which case one does not mourn for it, for it is doubtful whether the infant will live. Cf. Yad, Ebel I, 7-8; ibid. Yibbum Wa-Ḥalizah I, 5 and Maggid Mish. a.l. also W.G. to O.Ḥ. § 331, 3. But if one knows for certain that its months [of pregnancy] were complete,⁵⁴Shab. 136a; Nid. 42b. supra § 340, 30 regarding the rending of garments in such a case. e.g., [in the case] where [the husband] performed sexual intercourse and then separated himself [from her],⁵⁵Hag. Maim., Ebel I, 7 on the authority of Rashi. and [the infant] was born alive after nine complete months [of pregnancy],⁵⁶Even if some of the months of the nine months’ period consist of twenty-nine days, we mourn for the infant — P.Tesh. even if it died on the day it was born, one observes mourning rites for it. If it is not known whether it [was born after] nine months [of pregnancy] by the former [husband]⁵⁷From whom she was divorced and did not wait the required three months before her remarriage. Three months were required in order to determine whether she was with child from her first husband. or seven months [of pregnancy] by the latter [husband],⁵⁸Yeb. 36b, Tosaf. s.v. הא end. This ruling is applicable only if during the first three months after her marriage to the second husband she was in our presence, but we did not notice whether she was with child or not. Hence, we cannot apply the principle of following the majority of births which take place after nine months of pregnancy. Consequently, the majority is impaired and therefore both the first and the second husband are required to mourn for the child. But in a case where she was in our presence only after the three months’ period of her remarriage elapsed, we presume that she became pregnant by the first husband who alone is then required to mourn for the infant, since this birth belongs to the majority of births that take place after nine months of pregnancy. However, in the case of inheritance, we say that this child does not inherit the first husband after the latter’s death, for ‘in monetary matters we do not follow the status of the majority’ (אין הולכין בממון אחר הרוב) — P.Tesh. both [husbands] observe mourning rites⁵⁹Although mourning is only Rabbinical, nevertheless in a doubtful case such as this, we adopt a stringent view, for it would be disrespectful not to mourn for the infant at all — TaZ. But if the question of disrespect does not enter, e.g., where one of the husbands died, in which case, it would be said that he was the real father, we adopt a lenient view and the other husband observes no mourning rites for the infant, for mourning is only Rabbinical — P.Tesh. In the event that both fathers died, the son must mourn for both — Ibid. for it.⁶⁰Mord. Laws of Mourning; Hag. Maim. Yad, Ebel I and B.Yos on the authority of Tosaf. — G.

From the laws of the commandment is that which they, may their memory be blessed, said (Bekhorot 49a) that the commandment of redemption [begins when] the child is thirty days old, for [at that point he is no longer considered a potential] stillborn, as it is stated (Numbers 18:16), “And his redemption that you redeem, from one aged a month.” And this commandment is the responsibility of the father (Kiddushin 29a). If the father transgressed and did not want to redeem him, the commandment devolves upon the son, to redeem himself when he becomes an adult. The amount of the redemption is five sela, whether it be money equivalent to five sela or commodities that are the equivalent of money, such that their makeup is money, to exclude slaves, land and deeds — as if one redeemed him with them, he is not redeemed. The five sela may be given to one priest or to several priests, and the obligation is to give it to a male priest, and not to a female priestess; as it is written regarding the money of redeeming the firstborn, “Aharon and his sons.” If the priest wishes to return the redemption money after it is given to him, [the father] has [still] fulfilled his obligation, so long as the money is not given with this condition [in mind]. If he did give the money with this condition, the son is not redeemed, until he concludes in his heart to give it to him as a full gift. But if he did specify and gave the money with the condition that it be returned, and the priest was appeased to this, the child is redeemed.