279
edits
Introduction to Kesuba: Difference between revisions
From Halachipedia
→Signing the Ketubah
| Line 26: | Line 26: | ||
#Many have the practice to sign the Ketubah before the kiddushin at the Chosson'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 Chosson'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.</ref>, while others reject such a ketubah.<ref>Igrot Moshe EH 4:100, EH 4:105, OC 5:9 was opposed | #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. | ||
[http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=13101&pgnum=61 Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach in a teshuva] writes that it is signing a lie to sign a ketubah that was predated even if they did the kinyan since they didn't actually get married then and the ketubah states that they got married. Ketubah K'hilchata 4:10 cites both opinions and sides with stringent opinion. | |||
Those who allow a predated ketuba maintain that if a husband wants to obligate himself in more possessions, that is his prerogative. As to Rav Shlomo Zalman's concern about signing a lie, the ketuba never references the kiddushin/chupah (Ketuba K'hilchata). ([https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecture.cfm/880893/rabbi-michoel-zylberman/ishus-5777-5-filling-out-a-kesubah/ Shiur] by R' Michoel Zylberman, RCA/Beis Din of America) </ref> To avoid such an issue, some advise to postdate the ketubah so that the date on the ketubah matches that of the chuppah if the chatan's tisch occurs before sunset of the day of the wedding.<ref>As a ketuba/shtar m'euchar (later document) is kosher, provided the date on it matches the date of the chupah and it avoids the issues posed by Rav Moshe Feinstein (see earlier footnote). | |||
With this said, some who knew Rav Moshe Feinstein personally recount that he himself was not personally stringent and allowed for a ketuba to be predated. </ref> | |||
#If the ketubah was predated, that is, it was dated for a day prior to the actual wedding and prior to the actual kinyan for the ketubah, the ketubah is invalid.<ref>Rosh Hashana 2a, Ketubah K'hilchata (p. 20, 4:10)</ref> | #If the ketubah was predated, that is, it was dated for a day prior to the actual wedding and prior to the actual kinyan for the ketubah, the ketubah is invalid.<ref>Rosh Hashana 2a, Ketubah K'hilchata (p. 20, 4:10)</ref> | ||
#Initially it isn't proper to date a Ketubah for the night if it is signed during the day, though if one did so, it is kosher.<ref>Ketubah K'hilchata 4:13</ref> | #Initially it isn't proper to date a Ketubah for the night if it is signed during the day, though if one did so, it is kosher.<ref>Ketubah K'hilchata 4:13</ref> | ||
| Line 43: | Line 49: | ||
#The Chatan and Kallah should mention their names in the Ketubah as "(Chatan/Kallah's hebrew name) ben/bat (father's hebrew name) L'mishpachat (person's last name)" | #The Chatan and Kallah should mention their names in the Ketubah as "(Chatan/Kallah's hebrew name) ben/bat (father's hebrew name) L'mishpachat (person's last name)" | ||
#There is a question as to how to phrase the above clause when the child is adopted and the father's identity is unknown. Some of are of the opinion that the mother's name should be mentioned instead. Others suggest using the phrase "ben/bat Avraham" (referring to Avraham Avinu), using the formulation of " (child name) ben/bat ('''adopted''' father's name) HaMigadlo/Hamigadla | #There is a question as to how to phrase the above clause when the child is adopted and/or the father's identity is unknown. Some of are of the opinion that the mother's name should be mentioned instead. Others suggest using the phrase "ben/bat Avraham" (referring to Avraham Avinu), using the formulation of "(child name) ben/bat ('''adopted''' father's name) HaMigadlo/Hamigadla (who raised him/her)", or leaving out the father's name entirely such that it reads, "(child's name) L'mishpachat (last name)".<ref>Shu"t Minchat Asher 2:87, Mishpat HaKetubah 2:15:28. | ||
Rav Moshe Feinstein (Igros Moshe, Even HaEzer, 1:99) advised against using the formulation of "ben Avraham Avinu", as the term implies the person is a Ger. Such an assumption is misleading and could cause the person to marry those who are prohibited to him because of this miscommunication in status. | Rav Moshe Feinstein (Igros Moshe, Even HaEzer, 1:99) advised against using the formulation of "ben Avraham Avinu", as the term implies the person is a Ger. Such an assumption is misleading and could cause the person to marry those who are prohibited to him because of this miscommunication in status. | ||
Rabbi Dr. Melech Schachter (father of Rav Hershel Schachter) was of the opinion, as expressed a [http://download.yutorah.org/1982/1053/735663.pdf RJJ journal] article on adoption, that one should should use the formulation of "X ben Y Hamegadlo". While this formulation must be written in the Ketubah , the word "Hamegadlo" does not need to be read out loud when reading the Ketubah at the Chuppah. </ref> | Rabbi Dr. Melech Schachter (father of Rav Hershel Schachter) was of the opinion, as expressed a [http://download.yutorah.org/1982/1053/735663.pdf RJJ journal] article on adoption, that one should should use the formulation of "X ben Y Hamegadlo". While this formulation must be written in the Ketubah , the word "Hamegadlo" does not need to be read out loud when reading the Ketubah at the Chuppah. </ref> | ||
