Q&A: Mamzer and Child of a Menstruant
Mamzer and Child of a Menstruant
Question
As is known, a child conceived while the mother is in a state of niddah is not disqualified from entering the congregation, unlike a mamzer. Seemingly, is the reason the Torah did not disqualify such a child because this is a transgression that cannot really be checked and verified? Unlike a mamzer, who is born from a forbidden union with a married woman (for example), which has public notice, and there is a way to clarify and enforce it?
It seems that the Torah understands that a child of niddah is a lost battle from the outset, so it simply gave up.
Answer
I don’t see why niddah can’t be checked while a married woman can be. Both things can be known. In general, it’s hard to know who a child’s parents are through direct verification. In any case, this strange and baseless pilpul doesn’t seem to me to have any implications whatsoever. What’s the point of this discussion?
Not only baseless, but mistaken. Even the view that a mamzer results from unions prohibited by negative commandments agrees in the case of a sotah (which has major public notoriety) that the child is not disqualified from entering the congregation. And the Talmud in Yevamot 49 explains that this is because kiddushin takes effect with her, and the same applies to niddah.