If a woman is getting married and her father gives the couple a cow that shell bring into the marriage. If he dies or divorces that cow is hers.
If the cow has a baby the husband is allowed to shecht it and eat it. This is called Peros. But if the PEros have a baby the husband cant eat it because it is a Pero D'Pero.
What if the husband was shechting one of the Peros to eat and a baby jumps out. The Din of a Ben Pikuo is that it is considered like part of the mother and youre allowed to eat it even without Shechting. Here, do we say it is part of the mother and is a Pero and the husband can eat it or do we say it isnt like a Peo D'Pero and the husband can't eat it?
Aaron Pacanowski, Melbourne Australia
(a) In fact the husband receives the baby of the baby as well. Even though the Gemara (above 79b) states "The Rabanan instituted that the husband receives Peira but did not institute that he receives Peira d'Peira", this is only referring to "Keifel" (double payment) that accrues if somebody steals the baby, and is therefore payable to the wife. Rashi 79b DH Peira d'Peira explains that this means Keifel and the Rosh 8:6 writes that "the Rabanan did not institute that he receives Peira d'Peira" is referring to the fruit of the fruit which comes m'Alma - from outside, for instance the double payment for the stolen animal, while Peira d'Peira which come from the body of the animal - for instance the baby of the baby of the cow - obviously were given by the Rabanan to the husband. The Rosh cites as a proof for this our Mishnah (83a) that "The husband always eats Peira Peiros...." (unless he removes himself from this in some way, as is outlined in the Mishnah).
(b) However I do not think that this Din has any connection to the Din of Ben Peku'a. As far as the Din of Kesuvah is concerned the baby found inside the mother is considered as the "fruit" of the mother and not as the mother itself, because after all it is a separate entity. In contrast Ben Peku'a is a Din in Shechitah. This is derived from the verse "And every animal......in an animal, you may eat"(Devarim 14:6), from which we learn that an animal found in another animal after Shechitah may be eaten without further Shechitah (see Chulin 69a). This means that Shechitah on the mother is sufficient for the baby, but physically speaking it is clear that the baby is considered the fruit of the mother. So as far as the husband's property is concerned - in the case you mentioned - this would be considered Peira d'Peira.