Hi All,

The following question was asked to me:

"My mother had three miscarriages before giving birth. Am I considered a first born regarding the Pesach fast or not?"

I stated that I believe that he is not considered a first-born and therefore doesn't have to fast. However, I told him I'd look into the matter.

Does anyone no for certain the halacha in this regard?

I seem to recall that how far along were any of the miscarriages would be a salient fact.

I also had the occasion to hear my rabbi say over one possible explanation for how miscarriages fit into Hashem's Justice in a very kind way:

Sometimes a woman converts to Judaism while pregnant.

Her child is born to a Jewish mother, however was deprived of some of the experience of being raised in a Jewish mother's womb.

This Jewish baby may grow to live a full and complete life, however still has this lacking.

The soul of that Jew may need to come back to this world (and I might add - perhaps the order could well be reversed within our time) just to fill in that missing part of their experience.

Such a baby being carried within the womb of a Jewish mother doesn't need to be born. And the Jewish mother going through the experience will have provided that soul exactly what it needed.

Mishna Berura 470:2 says he must fast.

Shalom Peretz:

Does Mishna Berura require him to fast as a firstborn if his mother had given birth at 40 weeks to lo aleinu a still-born baby? Or a brother who did take a first breath but died shortly after, before a Bris?

Rob,
Mishna Berura says "one who comes after a 'nefel'". "Nefel" usually includes any baby that did not survive 30 days after birth.

Shalom Peretz:

Perhaps I am confusing with the laws of Pidyon HaBen? Do you happen to have the sources to look up the definition there of who is a firstborn? I think it exempts even if they were preceded by a miscarriage of a certain gestational age.

I looked up the sources and actually the halacha is that is the first baby was born alive after 40 weeks gestation the second brother does not have to fast.

There are two definitions for a first born in halacha. For pidyon haben the child must be peter rechem, the first to open the mother's womb. For this even an early miscarriage at 40 days of gestation (from conception, not from the last period the way the doctors count) is considered to have opened the womb. See Shulchan Aruch YD 305:23
To receive a double portion of inheritance the qualifications of a first born are reishis ono, the first strength which the gemora explains to mean the first child he would have to sit shiva for. This applies to a child who was born fully developed at the end of a full gestation. A child who does not survive 30 days after birth is suspected to have been premature and undeveloped. See Shulchan Aruch Choshen Mishpat 277:6 and Sma and Shach there.
Regarding the fast of the first born, the Magen Avraham 470:1 says that both types of bechor, for pidyon and for inheritance, must fast. Therefore one born after a stillbirth must fast. However the Dagul Merevava writes that only one who is certainly a bechor for inheritance must fast, but one born after a child who was born alive but did not survive 30 days is only a safek bechor and need not fast.
Peretz

quote:

Originally posted by rob:
The soul of that Jew may need to come back to this world (and I might add - perhaps the order could well be reversed within our time) just to fill in that missing part of their experience.

How would it be reversed during one's lifetime? And who's lifetime are you referring to? Am I missing something here rob, can you please clarify your statement?

quote:

quote:
Originally posted by rob:
The soul of that Jew may need to come back to this world (and I might add - perhaps the order could well be reversed within our time) just to fill in that missing part of their experience.


How would it be reversed during one's lifetime? And who's lifetime are you referring to? Am I missing something here rob, can you please clarify your statement?

Dear Sam:

Sorry for the confusion. Not reversed within one's lifetime, but rather, the order of which lifetime for that neshama could be reversed.

That is, it could be that the soul assigned to live out a few months in a Jewish mother's womb now and then leave with a miscarriage could be destined to have a full lifespan born to a woman who converts to Judaism while pregnant in our future.

It doesn't need to be the case that the full life happens before the miscarriage for this process of putting together a Jewish lifetime experience from conception to grave would be in that order.

...

Now if this process of putting together a Jewish neshama's experience in multiple pieces were capable to be a perfect joining, then I would suspect that Tzelofchad's situation could have been handled differently, and the Jewish people could have meritted Moshiach on the 2nd Shabbos after Har Sinai...

It is said in commentary on the verse quoting Tzelofchad's daughters that Tzelofchad died "for his own sins" that he was in fact the one put to death for gathering wood on the 2nd Shabbos.

And that particular aveira seems to be the only failing in proper observance of Shabbos 2 times in a row.

We have a principle that when the Jewish people observe 2 Shabbosim in a row we will merit Moshiach.

The reason for this is in part is that to observe Shabbos requires 6 working days... not several hundred working days!

Now, here's my point:

If Tzelofchad observed a perfect Shabbos the week before his "demonstration" then his neshama already had the full Shabbos experience, and all he was missing in his second Shabbos was the gathering...

Perhaps Hashem could have transplanted that lacking in experience from the one Shabbos to the next, splicing out of his neshama the taint of the "demonstration" aveira?

This would result in a righteous person having a permanent scar.

However Hashem knows that the Jewish people really are capable of fulfilling a perfect Shabbos without such a neshama transplant scar, and for the sake of avoiding recording Tzelofchad's scar as a permanent stain, we all have lived through this time.

(Note: The above is nothing but sheer speculation on my part as of about 10 years ago)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Magedman:
Hi All,

The following question was asked to me:

"My mother had three miscarriages before giving birth. Am I considered a first born regarding the Pesach fast or not?"

I stated that I believe that he is not considered a first-born and therefore doesn't have to fast. However, I told him I'd look into the matter.

Does anyone no for certain the halacha in this regard?[/QUOTE

Okay guys, here we go splitting hairs again.
If you want to get technical, a miscarriage isn't a birth. Period.

A Birth is a Birth. Therefore, he's the first BORN.

I think Rabbi Moncharsh knows what he's talking about.

Quote "Okay guys, here we go splitting hairs again.
If you want to get technical, a miscarriage isn't a birth. Period.

A Birth is a Birth. Therefore, he's the first BORN"

If you look at how the Torah calls the "first born" in many Mitzvos (like redeeming them) is called by the term "Peter Rechem." Loosely translated it means the first discharging of the womb, which would include a miscarriage. This is why the Talmud says you don't need to redeem a child after a miscarriage. Funny that the "Ruach Hakodesh" didn't get this