Bots, Bureaucrats, Interface administrators, Suppressors, Administrators, wiki-admin, wiki-controller, wiki-editor, wiki-reader
1,839
edits
Introduction to Kesuba: Difference between revisions
From Halachipedia
→What happens if the Kesuba is Misplaced?
No edit summary |
|||
| (34 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
==Three parts to the Kesubah== | ==Three parts to the Kesubah== | ||
#The First part of the Kesubah is known as the Ikar Kesubah and is a T'nai Bais Din. It is 200 Zuz for a Besulah and 100 for an Almanah. <ref>Many of the halachot noted in this article are based on a Shiur Given By R' Hershel Schachter http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/783803/Rabbi_Hershel_Schachter/Shiur_ </ref> | #The First part of the Kesubah is known as the Ikar Kesubah and is a T'nai Bais Din. It is 200 Zuz for a Besulah and 100 for an Gerusha/Almanah.<ref>Many of the halachot noted in this article are based on a Shiur Given By R' Hershel Schachter http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/783803/Rabbi_Hershel_Schachter/Shiur_ </ref> | ||
#The Second part is added on by the husband of his own free will, it's known as the Tosefes Kesubah. The Minhag today is to add on 100 Zekukin Cesef, from the times of the Maharil.(This Hischaivus from the husband is effected through a Kinyan Sudar, were the wife gives him for example a handkerchief, or the Mesadeir Kidushin or Eidim could also based off Zachin [Tosfos says that even though the handkerchief doesn't belong to her it is okay because it works through the din of Eved K'naani<ref>f</ref> | #The Second part is added on by the husband of his own free will, it's known as the Tosefes Kesubah. The Minhag today is to add on 100 Zekukin Cesef, from the times of the Maharil.(This Hischaivus from the husband is effected through a Kinyan Sudar, were the wife gives him for example a handkerchief, or the Mesadeir Kidushin or Eidim could also based off Zachin [Tosfos says that even though the handkerchief doesn't belong to her it is okay because it works through the din of Eved K'naani<ref>f</ref> | ||
#The Third part of the Kesubah is known as the Nedunya. To explain this we first need a little background. When a woman gets married there are two types of property he can bring into the [[marriage]], Nichsei Melug and Nicsei Tzon Barzel. Nichsei Melug is when she owns the property and the husband has the right to eat the Peiros. Nichsei Tzon Barzel is property that when she got married the value of it was written into her Kesubah. She may collect this even many years after the wedding (the value might have depreciated). <ref>Replace with desired reference</ref> | #The Third part of the Kesubah is known as the Nedunya. To explain this we first need a little background. When a woman gets married there are two types of property he can bring into the [[marriage]], Nichsei Melug and Nicsei Tzon Barzel. Nichsei Melug is when she owns the property and the husband has the right to eat the Peiros. Nichsei Tzon Barzel is property that when she got married the value of it was written into her Kesubah. She may collect this even many years after the wedding (the value might have depreciated).<ref>Replace with desired reference</ref> | ||
==Is Kesubah Deoraisa or Derabanan== | ==Is Kesubah Deoraisa or Derabanan== | ||
| Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
==The Value of the Ketubah== | ==The Value of the Ketubah== | ||
#Ashkenazim commonly include in the ketubah a total of 200 zekukin of silver for the Tosefet Ketubah and the Nidonya. There is a dispute as to the amount of 200 zakukim. Some say that it is 45.5 kilograms of silver and some say that it is 57 kilograms of silver. <ref>http://www.jlaw.com/Articles/KETUBAH.pdf citing Rav Moshe (Igrot Moshe 4:91-92) and Chazon Ish (EH 66:21)</ref> | #As mentioned above, the principal value of a ketuba is 200 zuz for a Besulah and 100 for a Gerusha/Almana. The Tosefes kesuba is usually an additional 50% of the principal value.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Even HaEzer Siman 67</ref> | ||
#If the kallah is a convert, if the woman converted before the age of three years and one day, her principal kesubah is 200 zuz. If she converted after that point, it is worth 100 zuz. | |||
#Ashkenazim commonly include in the ketubah a total of 200 zekukin of silver for the Tosefet Ketubah and the Nidonya. There is a dispute as to the amount of 200 zakukim. Some say that it is 45.5 kilograms of silver and some say that it is 57 kilograms of silver.<ref>http://www.jlaw.com/Articles/KETUBAH.pdf citing Rav Moshe (Igrot Moshe 4:91-92) and Chazon Ish (EH 66:21)</ref> | |||
==Printed Ketubah== | ==Printed Ketubah== | ||
| Line 25: | Line 27: | ||
===Predating the Ketubah=== | ===Predating the Ketubah=== | ||
#Many have the practice to sign the Ketubah before the kiddushin at the Chatan's tisch. However, some sign it underneath the chuppah. <ref>Rav Ovadia Yosef (Sova Semachot 1:5:12) </ref> | #Many have the practice to sign the Ketubah before the kiddushin at the Chatan's tisch. However, some sign it underneath the chuppah.<ref>Rav Ovadia Yosef (Sova Semachot 1:5:12) </ref> | ||
#It is proper to have the ketubah dated the same date as the chuppah occurs, however, after the fact if it was predated and there was a kinyan at the time of the signing on the earlier day, some allow such a ketubah<ref>Nefesh HaRav (p. 260) records Rav Soloveitchik's practice later in life to allow a predated ketubah if they did a kinyan at the time of the signing. Ketubah K'hilchata (p. 21, 4:12) allows writing the daytime date if they also do the kinyan at that time. Rav Asher Weiss (Shu"t Minchat Asher 2:87) defends the practice to predate the ketubah since the witnesses that sign the ketubah are only attesting to the fact that the husband has created a financial lien for his wife, not to the fact that they are getting married per se. </ref>, while others reject such a ketubah.<ref>Rav Moshe Feinstein (Igrot Moshe EH 4:100, EH 4:105, OC 5:9) was opposed to predating ketubot since, through the ketubah, the chatan creates a lien on his possessions to pay his kallah if (G-d forbid) they need to divorce. This lien applies on the property chatan owns as of the day when ketubah is signed. With this said, the other obligations of a husband towards his wife only begin the day they marry. If the ketubah is predated before the wedding, should the chatan acquire or divest property in the days in between, the kallah will get more or less than what she should be receiving should the couple divorce later. | #It is proper to have the ketubah dated the same date as the chuppah occurs, however, after the fact if it was predated and there was a kinyan at the time of the signing on the earlier day, some allow such a ketubah<ref>Nefesh HaRav (p. 260) records Rav Soloveitchik's practice later in life to allow a predated ketubah if they did a kinyan at the time of the signing. Ketubah K'hilchata (p. 21, 4:12) allows writing the daytime date if they also do the kinyan at that time. Rav Asher Weiss (Shu"t Minchat Asher 2:87) defends the practice to predate the ketubah since the witnesses that sign the ketubah are only attesting to the fact that the husband has created a financial lien for his wife, not to the fact that they are getting married per se. </ref>, while others reject such a ketubah.<ref>Rav Moshe Feinstein (Igrot Moshe EH 4:100, EH 4:105, OC 5:9) was opposed to predating ketubot since, through the ketubah, the chatan creates a lien on his possessions to pay his kallah if (G-d forbid) they need to divorce. This lien applies on the property chatan owns as of the day when ketubah is signed. With this said, the other obligations of a husband towards his wife only begin the day they marry. If the ketubah is predated before the wedding, should the chatan acquire or divest property in the days in between, the kallah will get more or less than what she should be receiving should the couple divorce later. | ||
| Line 39: | Line 41: | ||
#If the city in which the wedding is occurring is an established location for Get proceedings<ref>A list of these cities can be found in the pamphlet "הארץ לעריה" in the back of Shu"t Atzei B'samim by Rabbi Mendel Senderovic. | #If the city in which the wedding is occurring is an established location for Get proceedings<ref>A list of these cities can be found in the pamphlet "הארץ לעריה" in the back of Shu"t Atzei B'samim by Rabbi Mendel Senderovic. | ||
</ref> | </ref> , the name of the city is spelled in Hebrew the same way it would be normally spelled in a Get.(with exception to Chicago, IL and the Bronx, NY) | ||
#Those who are unsure how to spell the names of cities should either contact the Rabbanim in those cities to obtain the correct spelling, or speak to a local Dayan to obtain the standard transliteration for the city's name. | #Those who are unsure how to spell the names of cities should either contact the Rabbanim in those cities to obtain the correct spelling, or speak to a local Dayan to obtain the standard transliteration for the city's name. | ||
#There is a question as to whether or not the state in which the wedding is taking place has to be included. Some of the opinion<ref>Rav Mordechai Willig, as quoted by [https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecture.cfm/880893/rabbi-michoel-zylberman/ishus-5777-5-filling-out-a-kesubah/ Rabbi Michoel Zylberman] </ref> that it does not need to be included unless it is well known that multiple cities of the same name exist in different states. Others<ref>Rav Hershel Schachter, as quoted by Rabbi Michoel Zylberman, ibid.</ref> state that it should be included for mid-size cities that are not well-known. If a state does need to be included, it should be written in the formulation of "___ (name of city in Hebrew) B'Medinat __ (state name in Hebrew)". | #There is a question as to whether or not the state in which the wedding is taking place has to be included. Some of the opinion<ref>Rav Mordechai Willig, as quoted by [https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecture.cfm/880893/rabbi-michoel-zylberman/ishus-5777-5-filling-out-a-kesubah/ Rabbi Michoel Zylberman] </ref> that it does not need to be included unless it is well known that multiple cities of the same name exist in different states. Others<ref>Rav Hershel Schachter, as quoted by Rabbi Michoel Zylberman, ibid.</ref> state that it should be included for mid-size cities that are not well-known. If a state does need to be included, it should be written in the formulation of "___ (name of city in Hebrew) B'Medinat __ (state name in Hebrew)". | ||
| Line 52: | Line 54: | ||
"יוסף '''דמתקרי ג'ו''' בן יהודה" </ref> This is true even if the Hebrew names are not commonly used. If the person does not know or his/her Hebrew name, the English name may be written in Hebrew per transliteration conventions.<ref>Rav Moshe Feinstein (Even HaEzer 1:4) was of the opinion that one should not assign a Hebrew name to the Chatan/Kallah right before the wedding if he/she does not have one, as that is not a name that is well established with to identify the person. Using a name on a ketubah that does not adequately identify the party it is being used for renders the entire ketubah invalid. Therefore, in such a scenario, it is preferable to transliterate the person's English name into Hebrew using standard conventions. </ref> | "יוסף '''דמתקרי ג'ו''' בן יהודה" </ref> This is true even if the Hebrew names are not commonly used. If the person does not know or his/her Hebrew name, the English name may be written in Hebrew per transliteration conventions.<ref>Rav Moshe Feinstein (Even HaEzer 1:4) was of the opinion that one should not assign a Hebrew name to the Chatan/Kallah right before the wedding if he/she does not have one, as that is not a name that is well established with to identify the person. Using a name on a ketubah that does not adequately identify the party it is being used for renders the entire ketubah invalid. Therefore, in such a scenario, it is preferable to transliterate the person's English name into Hebrew using standard conventions. </ref> | ||
#If the person's first name consists of two parts (e.g. Reuven Yaakov), both parts of the name should appear on the same line each time it is written. | #If the person's first name consists of two parts (e.g. Reuven Yaakov), both parts of the name should appear on the same line each time it is written. | ||
#If the person's name is the same as a that of protagonist in Tanach, if the name is consistently spelled the same exact way throughout Tanach, that spelling should be used as the person's name, even if the person is used to spelling it differently. <ref>If there is variation (maleh or chaser) in Tanach, the person may spell his/her name the way to which he/she is accustomed if it is one of these spellings. </ref> | #If the person's name is the same as a that of protagonist in Tanach, if the name is consistently spelled the same exact way throughout Tanach, that spelling should be used as the person's name, even if the person is used to spelling it differently.<ref>If there is variation (maleh or chaser) in Tanach, the person may spell his/her name the way to which he/she is accustomed if it is one of these spellings. </ref> | ||
#In the first and last relevant places in the ketubah, the names of the Chatan and Kallah should be written as "__(Chatan/Kallah's hebrew name) ben/bat ___(father's hebrew name) L'mishpachat ___ (person's last name)" (e.g. Reuven Yaakov ben Shimon L'Mishpachat Goldberg)<ref>It is better to use this formulation instead of "Ploni ben Ploni Goldberg", as it implies that "Goldberg" is also part of the person's first name. </ref> | #In the first and last relevant places in the ketubah, the names of the Chatan and Kallah should be written as "__(Chatan/Kallah's hebrew name) ben/bat ___(father's hebrew name) L'mishpachat ___ (person's last name)" (e.g. Reuven Yaakov ben Shimon L'Mishpachat Goldberg).<ref>It is better to use this formulation instead of "Ploni ben Ploni Goldberg", as it implies that "Goldberg" is also part of the person's first name. Ketuba Khilchata p. 31 writes that those who put in the last names into a ketuba should add the word Lmishpachat before the last name. </ref> | ||
#In all other places in the middle of the ketubah where either of their names is required, only the Chatan/Kallah's full first name is used (e.g. Reuven Yaakov). | #In all other places in the middle of the ketubah where either of their names is required, only the Chatan/Kallah's full first name is used (e.g. Reuven Yaakov). | ||
#If the Chatan is a Kohen or a Levi, at the first and last mentioning of his name, the title should be added after writing in his father's name (e.g. Reuven Yaakov ben Shimon HaKohen). In the other locations, it should be mentioned after his first name (e.g. Reuven Yaakov HaKohen) <ref>Rav Moshe Feinstein (Igrot Moshe Even HaEzer 3:26) discussed a question where the father of a Kallah claimed at the time of the wedding that he was a Levi, but upon further research, discovered that his Levi status was actually more questionable that initially thought. Rav Moshe ruled that if it turns out that the father was indeed not a Levi, the Ketubah is still kosher M'ikkar HaDin, but it is recommended that a new ketubah be written and signed. </ref><ref>If the Chatan is a Chalal (the son of a Kohen who married a woman that was halachically prohibited for him to marry (e.g. a divorcee)), some of have the practice to write Reuven Shimon HaChalal ben Shimon HaKohen, or, as is recommended, to just leave out the Kohen title entirely (e.g. "Reuven Yaakov" with no title at all.</ref> | #If the Chatan is a Kohen or a Levi, at the first and last mentioning of his name, the title should be added after writing in his father's name (e.g. Reuven Yaakov ben Shimon HaKohen). In the other locations, it should be mentioned after his first name (e.g. Reuven Yaakov HaKohen).<ref>Rav Moshe Feinstein (Igrot Moshe Even HaEzer 3:26) discussed a question where the father of a Kallah claimed at the time of the wedding that he was a Levi, but upon further research, discovered that his Levi status was actually more questionable that initially thought. Rav Moshe ruled that if it turns out that the father was indeed not a Levi, the Ketubah is still kosher M'ikkar HaDin, but it is recommended that a new ketubah be written and signed. </ref><ref>If the Chatan is a Chalal (the son of a Kohen who married a woman that was halachically prohibited for him to marry (e.g. a divorcee)), some of have the practice to write Reuven Shimon HaChalal ben Shimon HaKohen, or, as is recommended, to just leave out the Kohen title entirely (e.g. "Reuven Yaakov" with no title at all.</ref> | ||
# | #The edim should sign the kesuba with their last name as well without the word Lmishpachat.<ref>Maadeni Shlomo p. 339 quoting Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach, Siddur Kiddushin (R' Adler) p. 29</ref> | ||
=== | ===Uncertain or Unknown Lineage=== | ||
#When the father's identify is completely unknown, some are of the opinion that the father's name should be entirely left out, such that it reads, "___(child's name) L'mishpachat ___(last name)".<ref>Shu"t Minchat Asher 2:87, Mishpat HaKetubah 2:15:28</ref> Others suggest using the mother's name be written instead.<ref>See Dagul M'reravah on Hilchot Gittin</ref> | #When the father's identify is completely unknown, some are of the opinion that the father's name should be entirely left out, such that it reads, "___(child's name) L'mishpachat ___(last name)".<ref>Shu"t Minchat Asher 2:87, Mishpat HaKetubah 2:15:28</ref> Others suggest using the mother's name be written instead.<ref>See Dagul M'reravah on Hilchot Gittin</ref> | ||
#There is a question as to how to phrase the clause pertaining to the identify of the Chatan/Kallah's father when the child is adopted. If the father's identity is unknown, some recommend to leave any mention | #There is a question as to how to phrase the clause pertaining to the identify of the Chatan/Kallah's father when the child is adopted. If the father's identity is unknown, some recommend to leave out any mention a father in the Ketuba. Some recommend using the formulation of "___(child's name) haNikra ben/bat ___ ('''adopted''' father's name) HaMe'gadlo/HaMe'gadla (who raised him/her)". (e.g. Reuven Yaakov haNikra ben Moshe Aharon HaMe'gadlo L'Mishpachat Goldberg).<ref>Rav Gedalya Schwartz, Av Beis Din of Beth Din of America, as quoted by [https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecture.cfm/881059/rabbi-michoel-zylberman/ishus-5777-6-filling-out-a-kesubah-2/ R' Zylberman]</ref> | ||
#If the mother of the Chatan/Kallah is Jewish, but the father is known to not be Jewish, the mother's name can be written instead. In more sensitive situations, there are some who suggest writing the name of the maternal grandfather instead. <ref>The formulation of the ketuba in such a case would be, for example, Reuven Yaakov ben avi imo Yosef.</ref> | #If the mother of the Chatan/Kallah is Jewish, but the father is known to not be Jewish, the mother's name can be written instead. In more sensitive situations, there are some who suggest writing the name of the maternal grandfather instead.<ref>The formulation of the ketuba in such a case would be, for example, Reuven Yaakov ben avi imo Yosef.</ref> | ||
#If the Chatan/Kallah is a Ger/Giyoret, "ben/bat Avraham Avinu" is used instead of a father's name. (e.g. Reuven Yaakov ben Avraham Avinu) | |||
# | ===Previous Marriages and Other Notable Statuses=== | ||
#If the kallah was previously married, her status should be noted as Matrachta instead of besulta so people should not be mistaken in thinking she is allowed to marry a Kohen.<ref>Rama, Even HaEzer 66:11</ref> For a widow, the world Almanata | |||
#If the Kallah is not a virgin, there are a variety of opinions as to how to notate this status instead of the word besulta. Options include beu'lah, arusa, or as is the common practice, isisa (איתתא).<ref>In such a case, the value of the kesubah can be still raised to 200 zuz, as the husband can obligate himself to as high of a value as he wants provided it is above the halachic standard, which in this case would be 100 zuz. (Shu"t Chasam Sofer Even HaEzer 133)</ref><ref>Sefer Kesuba K'hilchasa recommends the language isisa and this is the common practice.</ref> | |||
#If the kallah is a giyoret, the language giyurta or isisa is used instead of betulta. | |||
===Miscellaneous=== | |||
#If there is space left of any blank in the kesuba, a line should be drawn through the middle of the empty space so that no one can write anything in the space and falsify the kesuba. | |||
=== Mistakes === | |||
# If there is a mistake it is advisable to get a new kesuba and fill it out again. If that is not possible, sometimes it is possible to correct it at a certain point.<ref>Seder Kiddushin Vnesuin p. 37</ref> | |||
# If a word or letter is missing from the kesuba it can be fixed by writing it in the empty space between the lines right above where the word or letter belongs.<ref>Seder Kiddushin Vnesuin p. 38</ref> This solution does not work for a printed kesuba.<ref>Seder Kiddushin Vnesuin p. 39 quoting Pitchei Choshen (v. 8, Kuntres Binyanei Ketuba, fnt. 32)</ref> | |||
# There are any mistakes in the kesuba, such as with an extra word, the word can be scratched out or painted over with whiteout. If it is a mistake and a new word needs to be written on top of the where the mistaken word was erased.<ref>Seder Kiddushin Unesuin p. 38</ref> | |||
# If the kesuba text is corrected before the words הכל שריר וקיים are filled in and the edim sign it needs to have a line added that states that the certain word or letter was added or was written on top of a place that was erased and then הכל שריר וקיים is filled in and the edim sign.<ref>Seder Kiddushin Vnesuin p. 38 based on Shulchan Aruch C.M. 44:5</ref> | |||
# If the kesuba text is corrected after the words הכל שריר וקיים was written, as is the case for all printed kesuba's, then the correction can be made and an extra line stating that the word or letter was added or that the word was written on top of something that was erased below the kesuba that statement concludes with the words הכל שריר וקיים. The edim sign the kesuba and sign again below this statement of the correction.<ref>Seder Kiddushin Vnesuin p. 38</ref> | |||
=== Lost === | |||
# If a kesuba is lost it must be replaced with a kesuba d'irkasa.<ref>Seder Kiddushin Vnesuin p. 40</ref> | |||
# If after a replacement kesuba was written the old kesuba was found the old kesuba should be ripped up.<ref>Seder Kiddushin Vnesuin p. 41 quoting Shulchan Aruch E.H. 100:14</ref> | |||
==Making the Kinyan== | |||
# The minhag is to make a ''kinyan chalipin'' for the obligations in a ''kesubah''.<ref>Chomat Mishpat v. 1 p. 77</ref> | |||
# This is done by having one of the witnesses<ref>Chomat Mishpat v. 1 p. 77 writes that the minhag is to have one of the witnesses make the kinyan.</ref> or someone else who is acting on behalf of the ''kallah'', such as the ''mesader kiddushin'', give a ''kli'' (utensil) that is fit to be used, such as a handkerchiefs, to the ''chatan'' who then raises it up. This act causes the ''chatan'' to become obligated to fulfill his obligations as outlined in the ''kesuba''.<ref>Chomat Mishpat v. 1 p. 77</ref> | |||
# The ''chatan'' should be aware that his act of ''chalipin'' obligates him in his obligations of the ''kesubah''.<ref>Chomat Mishpat p. 80</ref> | |||
=== How high should the chatan raise the kli === | |||
# The ''chatan'' should raise up the ''kli'' 3 [[Tefachim|''tefachim'']].<ref>Shulchan Aruch C.M. 198:2 quotes a dispute between Rashi and Tosfot whether it is necessary to pick up the kli 1 or 3 tefachim. He quotes the opinion of 1 tefach second. Chomat Mishpat p. 79 writes that the chatan should pick it up 3 tefachim to be sure.</ref> | |||
# If he's doing a ''chalipin'' above a table, some say that it needs to be raised up 3 ''[[tefachim]]'' above the table, while others hold that it is sufficient to raise it 3 ''tefachim'' from the ground, even if it is within 3 ''[[tefachim]]'' of the table. Initially a person should try to avoid this by having the chatan raise the ''kli'' 3 ''tefachim'' above the table.<ref>Chomat Mishpat p. 79</ref> | |||
# The chatan should take grasp of a significant part of the kli. Some say that it is sufficient if he takes hold of part of the kli such that if he wanted he could pull the rest of it to him, while others argue that he must hold a significant part of the kli.<ref>Pitchei Choshen (Kinyanim 7:8)</ref> | |||
# For a handkerchief it is sufficient for the ''chatan'' to take grasp of 3x3 ''[[etzbaot]]'' of the handkerchief, even if the ''mesader kiddushin'' is still holding onto the other part of the handkerchief.<ref>Shulchan Aruch C.M. 195:4</ref> It is simpler for the ''mesader kiddushin'' to just give the entire handkerchief to the chatan and not hold onto part of it, but if he does it is still effective.<ref>Rav Schachter ([https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecturedata/783685/Shiur-#26Bava-Metzia%D7%99%D7%97%D7%9C%D7%95%D7%A7%D7%95,-%D7%97%D7%91-%D7%9C%D7%90%D7%97%D7%A8%D7%99%D7%A0%D7%99 Bava Metsia Shiur 26 min 16]) </ref> If someone does a ''kinyan chalipin'' with a ballpoint pen the ''chatan'' must hold the entire pen and it is ineffective if the ''mesader kiddushin'' is holding one part of it and the ''chatan'' the other half.<ref>Rav Schachter ([https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecturedata/783685/Shiur-#26Bava-Metzia%D7%99%D7%97%D7%9C%D7%95%D7%A7%D7%95,-%D7%97%D7%91-%D7%9C%D7%90%D7%97%D7%A8%D7%99%D7%A0%D7%99 Bava Metsia Shiur 26 min 10]) </ref> | |||
=== In whose presence === | |||
# The kinyan does not have to be done in the presence of the ''kallah''<ref>Shulchan Aruch C.M. 195:3, Pitchei Choshen (Kinyanim 7:9)</ref> and does not need to be done with the kallah.<ref>Chomat Mishpat p. 78. This is different from the tenayim which requiring kinyanim to be done both with the chatan as well as with the kallah, or their representatives. The reason is that in tenayim both sides have mutual obligations, as opposed to a ketubah, which is really an obligation upon the chatan. </ref> | |||
# The kinyan must be done in the presence of the ''edim'' who sign the ''kesubah''.<ref>Chomat Mishpat p. 78</ref> | |||
=== Ownership of the kli for ''chalipin'' === | |||
# The kli used for the chalipin does not have to belong to the one doing the ''kinyan'' on behalf of the kallah. However, he may not use the kli for chalipin without permission from the owner of the kli. Similarly, it is fine if the ''mesader kiddushin'' borrows a kli from someone in order to do the kinyan.<ref>Rama C.M. 195:4, Pitchei Choshen (Kinyanim 7:9)</ref> It is best not for the one doing the ''kinyan chalipin'' to own the kli.<ref>Chomat Mishpat p. 78 writes that it is advisable not to get involved with the dispute surrounding a borrowed kli for the chalipin.</ref> | |||
# Once the kli used for ''chalipin'' is transferred the transaction is finished, the chatan should return the kli to the ''mesader kiddushin''.<ref>Rama C.M. 195:4, Pitchei Choshen (Kinyanim 7:10), Chomat Mishpat p. 78. Rama explains that it is understood that the kinyan is done with the intention of symbolically enacting the transaction but the recipient of the kli will return the kli.</ref> | |||
=== Details of the kli for chalipin === | |||
# The minhag is to use a handkerchief for ''kinyan chalipin'', but really it is perfectly acceptable to use any utensil. If a cloth or handkerchief is being used, it must be at least 3 by 3 ''[[etzbaot]]''. It is not necessary for it to be 3 x 3 ''tefachim'', irrelevant of the material it is made out of.<ref>Shulchan Aruch C.M. 195:4. Rav Yitzchak Elchanan Spector (Bear Yitzchak CM 5:2) raises an issue that perhaps this measure of 3x3 etzbaot is only sufficient if the garment is made out of wool or linen, but other materials must be 3x3 tefachim since those are the measurements that are found regarding tumah for the cloth to be considered a kli (Rambam Hilchot Kelim 22:1). However, Rav Yitzchak Elchanan concludes that it is a kli for the purposes of chalipin even though it is not a kli for the purposes of tumah, as long as it is of requisite size of 3x3 etzbaot. Pitchei Teshuva 195:3 quotes this. Aruch Hashulchan 195:5 and Pitchei Choshen (Kinyanim 7:4 fnt. 13) agree. The Radziner ([https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=20463&st=&pgnum=507 Sidrei Taharot Kelim 248b]) has another approach to this question but with the same practical conclusion. He argues that the rules of chalipin and tumah are equated, but nonetheless 3x3 etzbaot suffices since a person can make a garment accept tumah once he actively uses it. Since doing a ''chalipin'' is a function of the garment, using it for the symbol transaction it thereby demonstrates that it indeed is a kli. Mishpat Hakinyan (Rav Ovadia Yosef Toledano 2:7 p. 192) concludes that 3x3 etzbaot is sufficient for all materials. Rav Schachter ([https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecturedata/783685/Shiur-#26Bava-Metzia%D7%99%D7%97%D7%9C%D7%95%D7%A7%D7%95,-%D7%97%D7%91-%D7%9C%D7%90%D7%97%D7%A8%D7%99%D7%A0%D7%99 Bava Metsia Shiur 26 min 4-12]) explains the view of Rav Yitzchak Elchanan. He adds that many rabbonim did not want to follow the lenient view of Rav Yitzchak Elchanon to allow a kinyan chalipin with 3x3 etzbaot of a cloth that wasn't wool or linen, so they used the corner of their wool jacket (''kapota''). </ref> Other non-cloth utensils do not have this requirement to be 3x3 ''etzbaot''. | |||
# For this reason a standard handkerchief is acceptable but a ''gartel'' is not acceptable for ''chalipin'' since it is too thin.<ref>Chomat Mishpat v. 1 p. 77. Chomat Mishpat writes that certain gedolim would specifically use a handkerchief and not a gartel because a gartel is not always 3 etzbaot wide, and wouldn't be considered a kli for purposes of tumah or chalipin. Interestingly, Pitchei Choshen (Kinyanim 7:4 fnt. 13) would allow using a gartel since he writes that a whole garment is automatically considered a kli even if it isn't the requisite measure of 3x3 etzbaot. He even writes that a certain gadol was careful not to use a garment that was thinner than 3 etzbaot, but he doesn't understand why there is any reason to be stringent. However, Morasha v. 3 p. 256 notes that this is a great nuance of the Pitchei Choshen, and Chomat Mishpat disagrees with Pitchei Choshen and disqualifies a gartel for chalipin. </ref> Some ''poskim'' allow using a ''gartel'' for a ''kinyan'' even though it is thinner than 3x3 ''etzbaot''.<ref>Pitchei Choshen (Kinyanim 7:4 fnt. 13) writes that it is obvious that a whole garment is considered significant and counts as a kli, even though it is thinner than 3 tefachim. He notes that even though he saw one gadol disqualify such a garment, he doesn't understand why this is the case. Mishpat Hakinyan (2:7 v. 2 p. 192) agrees with Pitchei Choshen. He quotes the Divrei Yatziv CM 55 that the minhag is to use a gartel for the kinyan chalipin. He also quotes the Shevet Halevi 9:307 who technically agrees that a gartel is acceptable for chalipin but not use it in practice because he wants to demonstrate that this transaction is important and not a game. </ref> | |||
# Some ''gedolim'' have a practice to use a pen (which isn't broken) for the ''kinyan chalipin''.<ref>Rav Schachter ([https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecturedata/783685/Shiur-#26Bava-Metzia%D7%99%D7%97%D7%9C%D7%95%D7%A7%D7%95,-%D7%97%D7%91-%D7%9C%D7%90%D7%97%D7%A8%D7%99%D7%A0%D7%99 Bava Metsia Shiur 26 min 16-7]) mentions that he saw that the practice in the bet din of Tel Aviv was to use a pen for the kinyan chalipin. Sh"t Baruch Omer CM 161 agrees that pen is fine for a kinyan chalipin. Rav Ovadia Yosef Toledano (Mishpat Hamechira p. 614) writes that his teacher, Rav Asher Weiss, usually does kinyan chalipin with a pen. He quotes that one gadol thought that a pen may not be used for chalipin since it runs out of ink at some point and is similar to fruit which become depleted. Rav Ovadia Toledano rejects this logic since many kelim become depleted after being used many times but are still considered a kli. </ref> | |||
# A ''kli'' can be used for ''chalipin'' even though it isn't even worth a ''[[prutah]]''.<ref>Shulchan Aruch C.M. 195:2, Pitchei Choshen (Kinyanim 7:7:4), Mishpat Hakinyan (v. 2 p. 186)</ref> | |||
# A disposable ''kli'' could technically be used for a ''kinyan chalipin''.<ref>Mishpat Hakinyan v. 2 p. 191 argues that a disposable utensil is a kli for chalipin even if it isn't susceptible to tumah. </ref> | |||
# A kli that is forbidden to benefit from may not be used for ''chalipin''.<ref>Bava Metsia 47b, Shulchan Aruch C.M. 195:2, Pitchei Choshen (Kinyanim 7:7), Mishpat Hakinyan (v. 2 p. 188)</ref> | |||
# Fruit cannot be used for the ''chalipin''.<ref>Shulchan Aruch C.M. 195:2, Pitchei Teshuva (Kinyanim 7:5), Mishpat Hakinyan (v. 2 p. 195)</ref> | |||
# There is a major dispute if an animal can be used for ''chalipin''.<ref>Rama C.M. 195:2 writes that it is acceptable to use an animal for chalipin as it is similar to a kli, however, Mishpat Hakinyan (v. 2 p. 195) notes that Shulchan Aruch seems to disagree and treats an animal like fruit. Pitchei Choshen (Kinyanim 7:5) also writes that animals are not acceptable but some allow using them for chalipin.</ref> | |||
# A coin cannot be used for ''chalipin''.<ref>Shulchan Aruch C.M. 195:2, Pitchei Choshen (Kinyanim 7:6), Mishpat Hakinyan (v. 2 p. 197)</ref> A coin that was disqualified as currency can be used for ''chalipin''.<ref>Rama C.M. 195:2 based on Tur, Pitchei Choshen (Kinyanim 7:6)</ref> Some ''poskim'' do not allow using a coin even if it isn't currency.<ref>Mishpat Hakinyan (v. 2 p. 199) based on Rambam</ref> | |||
==Eidei Kesubah (Witnesses)== | |||
#The Eidim should read the kesuba themselves before they sign it.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Choshen Mishpat 45:2, Shach Siman Katan 2 </ref> | |||
#Some are of the opinion that while the chatan and kallah include their last names in the kesuba, the eidim do not need to do so.<ref>The Ketubah K'hilchata (8:33) cites this as the common practice and that of Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach. Rav Hershel Schachter is of the opinion that even the eidim should include their last names as well. </ref> | |||
==What happens if the Kesuba is Misplaced?== | |||
#If a couple happens to misplace their Kesuba (and has no idea where it could be),<ref>Rav Chaim Kanievsky and Rav Wosner pasken that if the couple knows it is in the house, but unsure where in the house it is located, it is not considered halachically lost. </ref> it is prohibited for them to live together until another one (a Kesuba D'irkasa) is completed and signed. | |||
==Further Reading== | ==Further Reading== | ||
| Line 71: | Line 134: | ||
#Dinei Ishut ([http://www.otzar.org/wotzar/book.aspx?600307&pageid=P0001 vol. 1], [http://www.otzar.org/wotzar/book.aspx?600308 vol. 2]) by [https://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/עזרא_בצרי Rabbi Ezra Batzri], Former Dayan in the Beit Din HaRabbani HaGadol and Av Beit Din in Yerushalayim. | #Dinei Ishut ([http://www.otzar.org/wotzar/book.aspx?600307&pageid=P0001 vol. 1], [http://www.otzar.org/wotzar/book.aspx?600308 vol. 2]) by [https://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/עזרא_בצרי Rabbi Ezra Batzri], Former Dayan in the Beit Din HaRabbani HaGadol and Av Beit Din in Yerushalayim. | ||
#The Chief Rabbi of Bat Yam, [https://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/אליהו_בר-שלום HaRav Eliyahu Bar Shalom], has an encyclopedic, eight volume masterpiece entitled [http://www.lehmanns.co.uk/mwpt-hktvbh-h-krkim.html Mishpat HaKetubah], in which he addresses every aspect of Hilchot Ketubot. | #The Chief Rabbi of Bat Yam, [https://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/אליהו_בר-שלום HaRav Eliyahu Bar Shalom], has an encyclopedic, eight volume masterpiece entitled [http://www.lehmanns.co.uk/mwpt-hktvbh-h-krkim.html Mishpat HaKetubah], in which he addresses every aspect of Hilchot Ketubot. | ||
#Shiurim of Rabbi Michoel Zylberman, Gittin and Geirut Coordinator of the Beth Din of America and Geirut Coordinator for the Rabbinical Council of America. <nowiki>https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecture.cfm/880893/rabbi-michoel-zylberman/ishus-5777-5-filling-out-a-kesubah | #Shiurim of Rabbi Michoel Zylberman, Gittin and Geirut Coordinator of the Beth Din of America and Geirut Coordinator for the Rabbinical Council of America.<ref><nowiki>https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecture.cfm/880893/rabbi-michoel-zylberman/ishus-5777-5-filling-out-a-kesubah/</nowiki> | ||
https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecture.cfm/881059/rabbi-michoel-zylberman/ishus-5777-6-filling-out-a-kesubah-2/ </ref> | |||
#The sefer Get Mesudar is a commonly used as a reference to transliterate names (though not used in all cases) per minhag Ashkenaz. | #The sefer Get Mesudar is a commonly used as a reference to transliterate names (though not used in all cases) per minhag Ashkenaz. | ||
