Halakhah for Kiddushin 3:13
רַבִּי טַרְפוֹן אוֹמֵר, יְכוֹלִין מַמְזֵרִים לִטַּהֵר. כֵּיצַד. מַמְזֵר שֶׁנָּשָׂא שִׁפְחָה, הַוָּלָד עֶבֶד. שִׁחְרְרוֹ, נִמְצָא הַבֵּן בֶּן חוֹרִין. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר, הֲרֵי זֶה עֶבֶד מַמְזֵר:
R. Tarfon says: Mamzerim can cleanse themselves. How so? If a mamzer weds a bondswoman, the child is a bondsman. If he (his father) frees him, the son is a freed-man, (who may marry an Israelite). [Even ab initio a mamzer may marry a bondswoman to cleanse his children.] R. Eliezer says: He (the son) is a mamzer-bondsman. [the halachah is in accordance with R. Tarfon. And R. Tarfon concedes that if a bondsman marries a mamzereth, the child is a mamzer, for a bondsman has no pedigree.]
Gray Matter III
The Rishonim are divided as to how to resolve the Gemara’s dispute. The Tur (E.H. 42) states, as the primary opinion, that the betrothal ceremony is invalid, but he cites the Semag’s (Aseih 48) ruling that since the Gemara did not resolve the issue, we must rule strictly. The Beit Yosef (ad. loc. s.v. Hamekadeish) cites the Rambam (Hilchot Ishut 4:6), the Rif (Kiddushin 28a), and the Rosh (Kiddushin 3:13), who also rule that the kiddushin is invalid, and the Otzar Haposkim (42:2:18) likewise cites a very long list of Rishonim who agree with this view. Indeed, the Noda Biy’huda (2 E.H. 75, cited in the Pitchei Teshuvah E.H. 42:6) observes that the overwhelming consensus is that such a ceremony is invalid. However, the Beit Yosef also cites the aforementioned Semag, who cites the Sefer Yerei’im (167) as a precedent for his ruling.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy