Pidyon haben

And if that doesn't work, then he could go to the Nechasim.

But since he doesn't have a definite claim from either Reuven or Shimon, how could we say that he's able to take five slime for Pidyon from this state? If he doesn't have a from either of the brothers.

Really, we're talking about where the father died after 30 days.

If there was a lot of nechassim, he had a lot of property, you're right, the kind would be able to take even after the brothers had already divided it since there's plenty of property to go around he could take five slime from the state again even after it was divided half from this brother half from this brother everything works out fine over here what are we talking about where of mayor differentiates between before they divide the state versus after they divided it it's going to like al-khamish slime it's referring to a case where the state was only five slime That's all it was.

Also, everyone agrees with her papa.

And remember, we had just established that whatever the Yerushalem did receive, which was two and a half slime per Yerushalem, half of that is considered like Yerushalem, and half of that is considered just like regular Leku Chayis, Memela, only half of what each brother received is able to be collected from, and so it means there's really only two and a half slime that could be collected from by Baal Chayiv, which is the Kayin, So what's the Machalekes for a man, Rabbi Yehuda? The Machalekes is five and not half of five.

The Torah says that the Pidyon is five sloim, that means only five sloim and not anything less than that.

We may look at the brothers, had already divided the Yerusha, each one receiving two and a half, and really only... half of each of their 2 1⁄2 is able to be collected from by the Kayin.

You know that one of these is definitely a B'char.

And therefore the father is Chayiv in Pidyon HaBen.

So he's got to give Hamish Slayim l'Kohen.

The Radvaz writes in Bikurim Parikiral of Halakha Chaf, that this din is pashut, there is no chidish in this din, the only reason we're mentioning it is as an introduction to the next din.

So even in Lachash Cholku, they're Chayiv to give the Kohen to Chomishloim from between the two of them.

And the entire sukkah is going to be about this Machlokas.

What exactly are they arguing about? Whether after the Halukas HaYerusha, whether these two sons have to give the Pidyon HaBen to the Kohen or not.

The Rashba writes in the Tshuva that you see from here that the Chiv HaAv is not Pokea after the Ben becomes an adult.

Even though we had learned previously that as far as B'char for Yerusha, their halacha is that the person who was never identified, the B'char for Yerusha, never has the dinner of B'char.

As far as Pidyon HaBen, there is...

There is no such requirement.

If there is a B'char, opinion of Ben, we have to do opinion of Ben.

Rather, daloche is, we see from our Mishnah, that that obligation remains on the father.

And therefore, there's a shibut on the nechasim, from remains, even when the father's not here and the children are adults.

We've quoted before, in previous Yurim, the opinion of the Ramah that we should not do Pidyon HaBen through a Shliach, the opinion of the Ramah.

And many ask that throughout Halach, we know there's a concept of Shluch Hashel Odom K'moisai.

And we learn from there that the yichas goes after the father.

And therefore, why would this child be potter from Pidin Aben? Again, we proved to To you right now, what I'm saying is that the Leviah over here, that her son is going to be putter from Pentecost must be talking about a case where Abbas Levi is married to Yisroel.

Abbas Levi is married to Yisroel.

The child that they have is going to be putter from Pentecost because the grandfather was a Levi from the mother's side.

She doesn't care about what sheikh is.

We go after the father.

Why? Because the father already did.

Because as soon as he was 30 days old and the father was around, The father was a Cain, so who was Zeich in the Pidyon of the son, that was 30 days old now, and Chaim in Pidyon of the son, and the father himself, the father was Zeich, so it was done already, and therefore everyone agrees in that case.

Yes, I want to push back on something you just said, which is, you said it's not a demerit, but it actually is a demerit.

If we were making these rules today, we certainly would allow pidyon haben for a cesarean, and we wouldn't, bad word, but I can't think of anything else, penalize somebody for having a miscarriage, right? We would want them to still have the honor of having a child that gets the pidyon haben.

So it actually was a demerit.

I'll push back on your pushback because the question is, should we be thinking about Pidyon HaBen as an honor or a duty, an obligation, right? Now, one can think of – I tend to think of many of my Jewish obligations and duties as also an honor.

But it's in the category of something that you have to do, not that you get to do.

So one could say that the exemption from Pidyon HaBen – is itself something, is a helper, not a herder, right? Because it's one less honor.

You don't have to pay five shekels.

We'll get to that at some point.

What about...

Within the 30 days before the Pidyon HaBen is done, one of the twins passes away, dies.

So now the question is, maybe that was the Bechor, in which case he doesn't know anything.

Maybe it isn't the Bechor, in which case he owns five Salaim.

No commercial debt, no mitzvah.

And I'm saying in comments of my own there at the bottom, it would seem to me, therefore, that if the father wanted to say, you know what, I'm not sure, you can't bring a proof, But to be Yotze, here's your five Slaim.

I'm paying, I'm doing Pidyon HaBen Misofech.

I won't say I broke it because it's a Slaim.

However, underpinning this debate is a much deeper discussion.

The Ramah rules in Yo'adah 305 subsection 10 that a classic Pidyon HaBen should not be performed by a Shaliyach, meaning someone other than the father.

However, many disagree with the Ramah, noting that there is no reason why a Shaliyach should be ineffective in this case.

The Chatham Sofer addresses this question in his responsa, Yohadea Siman Resh Tzadigimel, Yohadea number 293, where he states that the reason why Pidyon HaBen should ideally not be done through a Shaliyach is because the origins of redeeming the firstborn is Makat Bechorot, which God carried out directly.

Ani volo malach, ani volo Shaliyach.

I am not an angel.

I am not a Shaliyach.

To this, Rabbi Shmuel David Gruss adds, on the basis of a teaching of the Imre Emet, that just as we redeem the firstborn, we also hope that God will redeem the people of Israel who are described as B'ni Bechori, meaning God's firstborn.

So the halacha is, I don't know which kid is the b'char, but I know I owe the chayim five sloyim.

Now, let's say one of these kids died, and now it could be that the father's no longer chayim in Pidyon HaBen for the other kids, because, as this entire whole daf is going to be about, the chayim can't demand it, so the father's not going to have to give it.

Now, the whole time we're going to be talking about we're never really talking about the Suffolk Isser aspect.

even though the mitzvah of B'char l'Kayin is a mitzvah in Yerudea, it's not in Chayish and Mishpat.