Kiddushin, Daf Samekh Het, Part 6
Introduction
The verse about the captive woman was sufficient to teach that kiddushin are invalid with a non-Jewish woman. But we still need a source that her children have her status they are not Jews.
אשכחן דלא תפסי בה קידושין ולדה כמותה מנלן אמר קרא (דברים כא, טו) כי תהיין לאיש וילדו לו כל היכא דקרינן ביה כי תהיינה קרינן ביה וילדו לו וכל היכא דלא קרינן ביה כי תהיינה לא קרינן ביה וילדו לו
We have thus found that kiddushin with her is invalid.
How do we know that her child has her status? The verse says, If there be to a man [two wives] . . . and they bear him [children] (Deuteronomy 21:15): where we read if there be, we also read: and they bear to him, but where we do not read: If there be we do not read: and they bear to him.
According to the reading of this verse, if the marriage is valid then the children follow his status the woman bears the children to him. But if the kiddushin are not valid, the children do not follow his status, they follow hers.
אי הכי שפחה נמי
אין הכי נמי אלא האשה וילדיה תהיה לאדוניה למה לי לכדתניא האומר לשפחתו הרי את בת חורין וולדך עבד הולד כמותה דברי ר’ יוסי הגלילי וחכ"א דבריו קיימים משום שנאמר (שמות כא, ד) האשה וילדיה תהיה לאדוניה
מאי תלמודא אמר רבא אדרבי יוסי הגלילי
If so, the same should be true for a female slave?
Indeed, this is true. Then for what do I need the wife and her children shall be her master’s ? For what was taught: If he [the master] says to his female slave, Behold, you are free, but your child [yet to be born] shall be a slave, the child is as herself, the words of R. Yose the Galilean. But the Sages say: His words are valid, for it is said: the wife and her children shall be her master’s.
How does this mean that?
Rava said: This refers to R. Yose the Galilean s [ruling].
If we have a verse that teaches that in all cases where the woman cannot be betrothed to an Israelite, the children follow the mother, then what do we need the verse from Exodus for? Why have a specific midrash when we have a general one?
The answer is that the verse from Exodus can be used for another midrash. A master tries to free a female slave but tells her that her future children will be his. According to R. Yose the Galilean, this does not work. Once she goes free, her kids are hers. However, the sages say the offspring belong to the master even after the mother is freed.
The verse quoted seems like it should explain the position of the rabbis. And in some ways perhaps it does the children belong to the master even if the wife does not.
But Rava does not read it that way. He reads it as referring back to R. Yose the Galilean. The children belong to the mater only if the mother does as well. If the mother does not, then her children born to her when free are also free. Yeah!