I have seen the original question. BUT this part of the question has remained unanswered:

"if a Bas Kohain had a child with a non-Jew, later divorced him (or he passed away) then marries a Kohan and has a child with him; is this child a BECHOR?"


1 Answer 1


It depends what relevance of the term "BECHOR" you are asking about:

If you mean BECHOR for Pidyon Haben, redemption of the firstborn son, the father does not have to redeem his son, even though the child is born from a forbidden union. (see Shulchan Aruch YD 305:19). Anyway there would be no pidyon haben because pidyon haben is only for the MOTHER'S firstborn, not the father's. (see ibid 305:17).

If you mean A BECHOR for double inheritance, He will receive his double inheritance as any Bechor would.

  • why would a kohen have to do pidyon haben?
    – Loewian
    Commented Jun 7, 2018 at 14:00
  • @RibbisRabbiAndMore - Did you mean "even though the first child was born from a forbidden marriage"? Also, the source quoted just says that a kohen who had a firstborn that was a "chalol" would need a pidyon, but the kohen or the son acquires it himself. Wouldn't 305:17 be the correct source that it must be the mother's first born? Commented Jun 7, 2018 at 20:47
  • @user17260 1- No I meant even though the SECOND cohain's child was born through a forbidden union. A cohen who marries a ZONA = a woman who had relations with someone forbidden to her, as in this case where she had relations with the Goy, before marrying the cohen, any child born between the zona and the cohain is a challal. But I brought a source that a cohains son who's a challal Is also patur from pidyon Haben like any cohains son.2- You are right that a pidyon haben is only when its the Mother's firstborn. So no Pidyon would be needed anyway. [I edited it into the answer - Thank you. Commented Jun 7, 2018 at 21:34

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .