Sefer haChinuch states firsts have special status as indicated by the first fruits, and the first-born kosher animals and first born son. HaShem purifies us and gives us merits by our performing Mitzvos from the first of what we produce. This expresses a special recognition that all belongs to HaShem and we only receive this special allotment due to His loving kindness. It is sort of like one’s first paycheck that feels so special and we acknowledge this first “fruit” as really belonging to HaShem.
Sefer haChinuch further mentions that we commemorate and thank for the great miracle in Egypt that HaShem expressed His love by passing over the Jewish houses and saving the first-borns of the Jews.
Rashi offers a reason that we are making atonement for the selling of Rochel’s first-born, Yosef.
The Zohar mentions that this mitzvah is done to acquire a good life for the first born.
Kaballah also relates that the human counterpart below reflects the original spiritual activities. The concept of firsts in Creation applied to the original creation of Tohu. The strong nature of firsts when not balanced resulted in the Shattering of the Vessels. So too with many first-borns in history (Kayin, Esav, Yishmael, Reuven, first-born at the Golden Calf) they were not able to properly integrate their first status and fell. On a personal basis, one has to be careful with one’s first thoughts and choices that need to be channeled within the total picture.
Why the exemption of the first-born of Kohanim and Leviim and even the first-born of daughter of a Kohein or Levi?
Chizkuni explains that all the people of the world are the children of HaShem. However, the original concept of the Creation first contained the Jews (HaShem placed a condition in the Creation that the Jews would accept the Torah), this indicates that the Jews were chosen and selected as the first-born to serve HaShem. This is reflected in the original special status of the first-borns as the servants of HaShem. However, at the incident of the Golden Calf, he first-borns were removed from that status which was passed over to the tribe of Levi (Maaser of the sons of Yaacov as tenth from the youngest). The mitzvah of redemption of the first-born acknowledges the “transfer” of status from the first born to the tribe of Levi (and specifically the Kohanim). One of the gifts to the Koheinim is the five shekalim of the redemption of the first-born. Further, the status of first-born is established from the “opening of the womb” of the mother. Thus, the special exemption of redemption is if either the mother or father is a child from a Levi or Kohein.
Rabbenu Bacheye explains the mitzvah of Pidyon haBen is a rectification of the selling of Yosef (first-born of Rochel). All the Jews were included as mutually responsible of this sate. However, the tribe of Levi accomplished their rectification by the entire tribe (male and female) not participating in the Golden Calf and thus, exempt their children from future redemption.
"Mai ba'is tfay?" - "Which do you prefer? Would you rather keep the five shekalim or take the child?"
At first glance, this appears to be a ludicrous question, for no father would choose the money over his son. Furthermore, the implication that the father has the option of leaving his son with the Kohain in exchange for keeping the money is not halachically correct; the Torah requires a father to redeem his son. Additionally, the child is not the property of the Kohain, and if, theoretically, the father would refuse to redeem his child, the Kohain would have no claim to the child. Therefore, what was Chazal's intention when they incorporated this question into the Pidyon Haben ceremony?
Chazal are bringing to our attention that unfortunately very often we go through life choosing money over our children. We continuously rationalize working late or conducting business which keeps us away from our children. We claim that we are doing this for their future, however, living a more moderate lifestyle which would enable us to have more of an impact on our children would be infinitely more beneficial for them. The notion that we are helping our children by providing them with material benefits is really a rationalization for choosing the money over the child.
