הסדרה בהלכה - בראשית כז - כתובה: דאורייתא או דרבנן?
(טו) וַיִּרְאֶ֣הָ יְהוּדָ֔ה וַֽיַּחְשְׁבֶ֖הָ לְזוֹנָ֑ה כִּ֥י כִסְּתָ֖ה פָּנֶֽיהָ׃ (טז) וַיֵּ֨ט אֵלֶ֜יהָ אֶל־הַדֶּ֗רֶךְ וַיֹּ֙אמֶר֙ הָֽבָה־נָּא֙ אָב֣וֹא אֵלַ֔יִךְ כִּ֚י לֹ֣א יָדַ֔ע כִּ֥י כַלָּת֖וֹ הִ֑וא וַתֹּ֙אמֶר֙ מַה־תִּתֶּן־לִ֔י כִּ֥י תָב֖וֹא אֵלָֽי׃
(15) When Judah saw her, he took her for a harlot; for she had covered her face. (16) So he turned aside to her by the road and said, “Here, let me sleep with you”—for he did not know that she was his daughter-in-law. “What,” she asked, “will you pay for sleeping with me?”

יחסי אישות לפני ואחרי מתן תורה

קֹדֶם מַתַּן תּוֹרָה הָיָה אָדָם פּוֹגֵעַ אִשָּׁה בַּשּׁוּק אִם רָצָה הוּא וְהִיא נוֹתֵן לָהּ שְׂכָרָהּ וּבוֹעֵל אוֹתָהּ עַל אֵם הַדֶּרֶךְ וְהוֹלֵךְ. וְזוֹ הִיא הַנִּקְרֵאת קְדֵשָׁה. מִשֶּׁנִּתְּנָה הַתּוֹרָה נֶאֶסְרָה הַקְּדֵשָׁה שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דברים כג יח) "לֹא תִהְיֶה קְדֵשָׁה מִבְּנוֹת יִשְׂרָאֵל". לְפִיכָךְ כָּל הַבּוֹעֵל אִשָּׁה לְשֵׁם זְנוּת בְּלֹא קִדּוּשִׁין לוֹקֶה מִן הַתּוֹרָה לְפִי שֶׁבָּעַל קְדֵשָׁה:
Before the Torah was given, when a man would meet a woman in the marketplace, and he and she desired, he could give her payment, engage in relations with her wherever they desired, and then depart. Such a woman is referred to as a harlot.
When the Torah was given, [relations with] a harlot became forbidden, as [Deuteronomy 23:18] states: "There shall not be a harlot among the children of Israel." Therefore, a person who has relations with a woman for the sake of lust, without kiddushin, receives lashes as prescribed by the Torah, because he had relations with a harlot.

(א) קֹדֶם מַתַּן תּוֹרָה הָיָה אָדָם פּוֹגֵעַ אִשָּׁה בַּשּׁוּק אִם רָצָה הוּא וְהִיא לִשָּׂא אוֹתָהּ מַכְנִיסָהּ לְתוֹךְ בֵּיתוֹ וּבוֹעֲלָהּ בֵּינוֹ לְבֵין עַצְמוֹ וְתִהְיֶה לוֹ לְאִשָּׁה. כֵּיוָן שֶׁנִּתְּנָה תּוֹרָה נִצְטַוּוּ יִשְׂרָאֵל שֶׁאִם יִרְצֶה הָאִישׁ לִשָּׂא אִשָּׁה יִקְנֶה אוֹתָהּ תְּחִלָּה בִּפְנֵי עֵדִים וְאַחַר כָּךְ תִּהְיֶה לוֹ לְאִשָּׁה שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דברים כב יג) "כִּי יִקַּח אִישׁ אִשָּׁה וּבָא אֵלֶיהָ":

(1) Before the Torah was given, when a man would meet a woman in the marketplace and he and she decided to marry, he would bring her home, conduct relations in private and thus make her his wife. Once the Torah was given, the Jews were commanded that when a man desires to marry a woman, he must acquire her as a wife in the presence of witnesses. [Only] after this, does she become his wife. This is [alluded to in Deuteronomy 22:13]: "When a man takes a wife and has relations with her...."

(ז) וְצָרִיךְ לִכְתֹּב כְּתֻבָּה קֹדֶם כְּנִיסָה לַחֻפָּה וְאַחַר כָּךְ יִהְיֶה מֻתָּר בְּאִשְׁתּוֹ וְהֶחָתָן נוֹתֵן שְׂכַר הַסּוֹפֵר...

(7) [A man] must write a marriage contract (a ketubah) [for his wife] before their entry into the chuppah; only afterwards is he permitted to live with his wife. The groom pays the scribe's fee.
How much does [the marriage contract require him to promise to have paid to her in the event of his death or his divorcing her]? If the bride is a virgin, no less than 200 dinarim. If she is not a virgin, no less than 100 dinarim.18Rav Ovadiah of Bertinoro (Pe'ah 8:8) states that this is the sum of money required for a person to support himself for one year. This amount is called the fundamental requirement of the ketubah.
If the groom desires to add to this amount he may, [promising any sum,] even a talent of gold. The laws pertaining to this addition and to the fundamental requirement of the ketubah are the same with regard to most matters. Therefore, every time the term ketubah is used without any additional explanation, it should be understood to include the fundamental requirement of the ketubah together with the additional amount [promised by the groom].
It was our Sages19This point is a matter of debate, for there are certain opinions (among them that of Rabbenu Tam) that maintain that the obligation to pay the fundamental requirement of the ketubah stems from the Torah. Support for the latter opinion may be drawn from the wording commonly used in most Ashkenazic ketubot "200 silver zuz that are rightfully yours [as required by] the Torah." [Significantly, even the text of the ketubah in the standard printed texts of the Mishneh Torah (Hilchot Yibbum VaChalitzah 4:34) includes this phrase. Nevertheless, many authorities maintain that this is a printer's addition and not the Rambam's own words.]
Most authorities (including Rabbenu Asher) agree that the obligation to pay the fundamental requirement of the Ketubah is Rabbinic in origin. Nevertheless, the abovementioned phrase is traditionally included in the ketubah to teach us the value of the silver to which we are referring, as is explained in the notes on the following halachah.
who ordained the requirement of [writing] a ketubah for a woman. [They instituted this obligation] so that it would not be a casual matter for [her husband] to divorce her.20I.e., when the man understands that divorcing his wife will cost him a significant sum of money, he will think twice before doing so.

(א)... רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, אִם רָצָה, כּוֹתֵב לִבְתוּלָה שְׁטָר שֶׁל מָאתַיִם, וְהִיא כוֹתֶבֶת, הִתְקַבַּלְתִּי מִמְּךָ מָנֶה, וּלְאַלְמָנָה, מָנֶה, וְהִיא כוֹתֶבֶת, הִתְקַבַּלְתִּי מִמְּךָ חֲמִשִּׁים זוּז. רַבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר, כָּל הַפּוֹחֵת לִבְתוּלָה מִמָּאתַיִם וּלְאַלְמָנָה מִמָּנֶה, הֲרֵי זוֹ בְעִילַת זְנוּת:

(1) Although they said as a principle that a virgin collects two hundred dinars as payment for her marriage contract and that a widow collects one hundred dinars, if the husband wishes to add even an additional ten thousand dinars, he may add it. If she is then widowed or divorced, whether from betrothal or whether from marriage, she collects the entire amount, including the additional sum. Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya says: If she is widowed or divorced from marriage, she collects the total amount, but if she is widowed or divorced from betrothal, a virgin collects two hundred dinars and a widow one hundred dinars. This is because he wrote the additional amount for her in the marriage contract only in order to marry her. Rabbi Yehuda says a related halakha with regard to the marriage contract: If he wishes, he may write for a virgin a document for two hundred dinars as is fitting for her, and she may then write a receipt stating: I received one hundred dinars from you. Even though she has not actually received the money, the receipt serves as a means for her to waive half of the amount due to her for her marriage contract. According to Rabbi Yehuda, the financial commitment in the marriage contract is a right due to the wife, which she may waive if she chooses to do so. And similarly, for a widow he may write one hundred dinars in the contract and she may write a receipt stating: I received from you fifty dinars. However, Rabbi Meir says: It is prohibited to do this, as anyone who reduces the amount of the marriage contract to less than than two hundred dinars for a virgin or one hundred dinars for a widow, this marital relationship amounts to licentious sexual relations because it is as if he did not write any marriage contract at all.

התפתחות הכתובה

(טו) וְכִֽי־יְפַתֶּ֣ה אִ֗ישׁ בְּתוּלָ֛ה אֲשֶׁ֥ר לֹא־אֹרָ֖שָׂה וְשָׁכַ֣ב עִמָּ֑הּ מָהֹ֛ר יִמְהָרֶ֥נָּה לּ֖וֹ לְאִשָּֽׁה׃ (טז) אִם־מָאֵ֧ן יְמָאֵ֛ן אָבִ֖יהָ לְתִתָּ֣הּ ל֑וֹ כֶּ֣סֶף יִשְׁקֹ֔ל כְּמֹ֖הַר הַבְּתוּלֹֽת׃ {ס}

(15) If a man seduces a virgin for whom the bride-price has not been paid,*the bride-price has not been paid So that she is unmarried; cf. Deut. 20.7; 22.23ff. and lies with her, he must make her his wife by payment of a bride-price. (16) If her father refuses to give her to him, he must still weigh out silver in accordance with the bride-price for virgins.
(כח) כִּֽי־יִמְצָ֣א אִ֗ישׁ נַעֲרָ֤ בְתוּלָה֙ אֲשֶׁ֣ר לֹא־אֹרָ֔שָׂה וּתְפָשָׂ֖הּ וְשָׁכַ֣ב עִמָּ֑הּ וְנִמְצָֽאוּ׃ (כט) וְ֠נָתַ֠ן הָאִ֨ישׁ הַשֹּׁכֵ֥ב עִמָּ֛הּ לַאֲבִ֥י הַֽנַּעֲרָ֖ חֲמִשִּׁ֣ים כָּ֑סֶף וְלֽוֹ־תִהְיֶ֣ה לְאִשָּׁ֗ה תַּ֚חַת אֲשֶׁ֣ר עִנָּ֔הּ לֹא־יוּכַ֥ל שַׁלְּחָ֖הּ כׇּל־יָמָֽיו׃ {ס}
(28) If a man comes upon a virgin who is not engaged and he seizes her and lies with her, and they are discovered, (29) the party who lay with her shall pay the girl’s father fifty [shekels of] silver, and she shall be his wife. Because he has violated her, he can never have the right to divorce her.
בָּרִאשׁוֹנָה הָֽיְתָה מוּנַחַת כְּתוּבָּתָהּ אֶצֶל אֲבוֹתֶיהָ וְהָֽיְתָה קַלָּה בְעֵינָיו לְגָֽרְשָׁהּ. וְחָֽזְרוּ וְהִתְקִינוּ שֶׁתְּהֵא כְּתוּבָּתָהּ אֶצֶל בַּעֲלָהּ. אַף עַל פִּי כֵן הָֽיְתָה קַלָּה בְעֵינָיו לְגָֽרְשָׁהּ. וְחָֽזְרוּ וְהִתְקִינוּ שֶׁיְּהֵא אָדָם לוֹקֵחַ בִּכְתוּבַּת אִשְׁתּוֹ כּוֹסוֹת וּקְעָרוֹת וְתַמְחוּיִים. הָדָא הִיא דְתַנִּינָן. לֹא יֹאמַר לָהּ הֲרֵי כְתוּבָּתֵיךְ מוּנַחַת עַל הַשּׁוּלְחָן. אֶלָּא כָל־נְכָסָיו אַחֲרָאִין לִכְתוּבָּתָהּ. חָזְרוּ וְהִתְקִינוּ שֶׁיְּהֵא אָדָם נוֹשֵׂא וְנוֹתֵן בִּכְתוּבַּת אִשְׁתּוֹ. שֶׁמִּתּוֹךְ שֶׁאָדָם נוֹשֵׂא וְנוֹתֵן בִּכְתוּבַּת אִשְׁתּוֹ וְהוּא מְאַבְּדָהּ הִיא קָשָׁה בְעֵינָיו לְגָֽרְשָׁהּ.
In earlier times, her ketubah was deposited with her family; then it was easy for him to divorce her. They then instituted that her ketubah had to be deposited with her husband; even so it was easy for him to divorce her. Then they instituted that a man should buy with his wife’s ketubah cups, plates, and bowls; that is what we did state: “He should not say to her ‘here your ketubah is lying on the table’ but all his properties are pledged for her ketubah.” Finally they instituted that a person should use his wife’s ketubah in business, then because he uses his wife’s ketubah in his business dealings he loses track of it and it becomes difficult for him to divorce her.
אָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה: בָּרִאשׁוֹנָה הָיוּ כּוֹתְבִין לִבְתוּלָה מָאתַיִם וּלְאַלְמָנָה מָנֶה, וְהָיוּ מַזְקִינִין וְלֹא הָיוּ נוֹשְׂאִין נָשִׁים, עַד שֶׁבָּא שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן שָׁטַח וְתִיקֵּן, כׇּל נְכָסָיו אַחְרָאִין לִכְתוּבָּתָהּ. תַּנְיָא נָמֵי הָכִי: בָּרִאשׁוֹנָה הָיוּ כּוֹתְבִין לִבְתוּלָה מָאתַיִם וּלְאַלְמָנָה מָנֶה, וְהָיוּ מַזְקִינִין וְלֹא הָיוּ נוֹשְׂאִין נָשִׁים. הִתְקִינוּ שֶׁיִּהְיוּ מַנִּיחִין אוֹתָהּ בְּבֵית אָבִיהָ. וַעֲדַיִין: כְּשֶׁהוּא כּוֹעֵס עָלֶיהָ, אוֹמֵר לָהּ: ״לְכִי אֵצֶל כְּתוּבָּתִיךְ״, הִתְקִינוּ שֶׁיִּהְיוּ מַנִּיחִין אוֹתָהּ בְּבֵית חָמִיהָ. עֲשִׁירוֹת עוֹשׂוֹת אוֹתָהּ קְלָתוֹת שֶׁל כֶּסֶף וְשֶׁל זָהָב, עֲנִיּוֹת הָיוּ עוֹשׂוֹת אוֹתָהּ עָבִיט שֶׁל מֵימֵי רַגְלַיִם. וַעֲדַיִין, כְּשֶׁכּוֹעֵס עָלֶיהָ אוֹמֵר לָהּ: ״טְלִי כְּתוּבָּתִיךְ וָצֵאִי״. עַד שֶׁבָּא שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן שָׁטַח וְתִיקֵּן, שֶׁיְּהֵא כּוֹתֵב לָהּ: כׇּל נְכָסַי אַחְרָאִין לִכְתוּבָּתָהּ.
§ The Gemara discusses the background for the rule that the husband’s property is mortgaged for the marriage contract. Rav Yehuda said: At first they would write for a virgin two hundred dinars and for a widow one hundred dinars. They would then demand that this amount be available in cash, and then the men would grow old and would not marry women, as they did not all possess such large sums of money, until Shimon ben Shataḥ came and instituted an ordinance that a man need not place the money aside in practice. Rather, all of his property is guaranteed for her marriage contract. The Gemara comments: That opinion is also taught in a baraita: At first they would write for a virgin two hundred and for a widow one hundred dinars, and they would grow old and would not marry women, since the women were concerned that their marriage contract money would be wasted or lost, and they had no guarantee that it would be collected. The Sages therefore instituted an ordinance that they should place it, the sum of the marriage contract, in her father’s house, thereby ensuring its safekeeping. And still problems arose, as when he was angry at his wife, he would say to her: Go to your marriage contract, as it was too easy for them to divorce. Therefore, the Sages instituted an ordinance that they would place it in her father-in-law’s house, i.e., in her husband’s house. And wealthy women would craft their marriage contract money into baskets of silver and of gold, while poor ones would craft it into a large vessel for the collection of urine, as their marriage contract was large enough only for a small vessel. And still, when he was angry at her he would say to her: Take your marriage contract and leave, until Shimon ben Shataḥ came and instituted an ordinance that he does not actually give her the money for her marriage contract. Rather, he should write to her: All my property is guaranteed for her marriage contract, and it is not localized to a particular place or object. Consequently, he would need to sell some of his property if he wished to divorce her, and would therefore think carefully before undertaking such a drastic course of action.

הדיון בתלמודים

בְּתוּלָה כְּתוּבָּתָהּ מָאתַיִם וְאַלְמָנָה מְנָה. כול׳. חוּנָה בְשֵׁם שְׁמוּאֵל. בְּשֶׁקֶל הַקּוֹדֶשׁ. רִבִּי בָּא בַּר בִּינָא אָמַר. מַטְבֵּעַ יוֹצֵא. מַתְנִיתָא מְסַייְעָה לְרִבִּי בָּא בַּר בִּינָא. וְחָמֵשׁ סְלָעִים שֶׁל בֵּן בִּמְנָה צוֹרִי שְׁלֹשִׁים שֶׁל עֶבֶד חֲמִשִׁים שֶׁל אוֹנֵס וְשֶׁל מְפַתֶּה מֵאָה שֶׁל מוֹצִיא שֶׁם רַע כּוּלָּן בְּשֶׁקֶל הַקּוֹדֶשׁ בְּמְנָה צוֹרִי. וְלֹא תַנָּא כְּתוּבַּת אִשָּׁה עִמָּהֶן. אָמַר רִבִּי אָבִין. כְּלוּם לָֽמְדוּ מִכְּתוּבַּת אִשָּׁה לֹא מֵאוֹנֵס וּמִמְּפַתֶּה. מִכֵּיוָן דְּתַנִּינָן. הָאוֹנֵס וְהַמְפַתֶּה. כְּמָאן דְּתַנָּא. כְּתוּבַּת אִשָּׁה עִמָּהֶן. עַד כְּדוֹן בְּתוּלָה. אַלְמָנָה מַאי. אָמַר רַב חִינְנָא. דַּייָהּ לָאַלְמָנָה שֶׁתִּיטּוֹל מַחֲצִית בְּתוּלָה.

MISHNAH: The ketubah106The minimum payable to the bride at the dissolution of the marriage either by divorce or by the husband’s death. This does not exclude that the ketubah document may stipulate higher amounts. of a virgin is 200 and that of a widow one mina107100 zuz. The Mishnah remains noncommittal about the nature of the coin involved.. The ketubah of virgins who after a preliminary marriage53Mishnah 1:2. In all three cases the husband died before the ḥuppah ceremony and the women are presumed to be virgins. become widows, divorcees, or who received ḥalîṣah, is 200 and they are subject to a claim of non-virginity108To invalidate the document if they are found not to be virgins.. The ketubah of a proselyte, a prisoner, and a slave who were redeemed109It is assumed that a female kidnap victim will be raped as a matter of course. But a girl raped at age less than 3 years still is a virgin., freed110Since slaves can have guiltless sexual relations with Gentiles, it is assumed that they do have such relations., or converted111There is no presumed minimal age for sexual activity of Gentiles. Therefore, a proselyte aged more than 3 years at conversion is presumed not to be virginal. at less than three years and one day of age, is 200 and they are subject to a claim of non-virginity108To invalidate the document if they are found not to be virgins.. HALAKHAH: “The ketubah of a virgin is 200 and that of a widow one mina,” etc. Huna in the name of Samuel: In the Temple šeqel112The Temple šeqel coins struck in Jerusalem during the first war with the Romans are silver coins weighing between 13.5 and 14.3 g. The corresponding Tyrian coinage is about 13.5 g. A Temple šeqel in Babylonian theory is twice the weight of a common šeqel, which is the name of the two-denar coin. This means that the Temple šeqel is equal, both in the Yerushalmi and in the Babli, to the Roman tetradrachma (סֶלַע), based on an unadulterated silver denar (drachma, זוּז) of 3.4 g. Tyre ceased to mint coins between the reigns of Augustus and Septimius Severus, meaning that Tyrian coins in the Mishnaic period were unadulterated silver. Samuel requires that the ketubah be adjusted for the inflation caused by the debasement of the currency in circulation. It may be that he holds that the basic ketubah amount is a biblical requirement (cf. Halakhah 13:11).. Rebbi Abba bar Bina said, circulating coin113The value of the ketubah has to be computed on the basis of the currency in circulation.. A Mishnah supports Rebbi Abba bar Bina114Mishnah Bekhorot 8:7; cf. Tosephta Ketubot 12:6.: “The five tetradrachmas of the firstborn115The redemption of the firstborn, Num. 3:47, identifying the biblical šeqel as tetradrachma. are in Tyrian coinage, the 30 of the slave11630 šeqel weregilt for the killing of another person’s slave by one’s ox, Ex. 21:32., the 50 of the rapist and the seducer11750 šeqel bride money paid by the rapist (Deut. 22:29) and, by inference, the seducer (Ex. 22:15–16) of a girl., the 100 of the slanderer118The fine imposed on a man wrongly accusing his wife of committing adultery during her preliminary marriage period, Deut. 22:19., are all computed in Temple šeqels in Tyrian coinage.” A woman’s ketubah is not stated with them. Rebbi Abin said, did they not learn the ketubah of a woman from the rapist and the seducer119Since the 50 tetradrachmas due from the rapist and the seducer are exactly 200 denarii; either these 200 denarii are the “bride money” described in the verse Ex. 22:16 or at least they are the inspiration for the rabbis to fixate the minimum ketubah at 200 zuz.? Since the rapist and the seducer are mentioned, it is as if women’s ketubah was stated with them120The Mishnah from Bekhorot does not prove anything.. So far about a virgin. What about a widow? Rav Ḥinena said, it is enough for a widow that she take half of a virgin’s portion121Everybody agrees that the ketubah of a widow is a rabbinic institution..

(יא) ... נָשָׂא אִשָּׁה בְאֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל וְגֵרְשָׁהּ בְּאֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל, נוֹתֵן לָהּ מִמְּעוֹת אֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל. נָשָׂא אִשָּׁה בְאֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל וְגֵרְשָׁהּ בְּקַפּוֹטְקִיָּא, נוֹתֵן לָהּ מִמְּעוֹת אֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל. נָשָׂא אִשָּׁה בְקַפּוֹטְקִיָּא וְגֵרְשָׁהּ בְּאֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל, נוֹתֵן לָהּ מִמְּעוֹת אֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל. רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹמֵר, נוֹתֵן לָהּ מִמְּעוֹת קַפּוֹטְקִיָּא. נָשָׂא אִשָּׁה בְקַפּוֹטְקִיָּא וְגֵרְשָׁהּ בְּקַפּוֹטְקִיָּא, נוֹתֵן לָהּ מִמְּעוֹת קַפּוֹטְקִיָּא:

(11) All may force their family to ascend to Eretz Yisrael, i.e., one may compel his family and household to immigrate to Eretz Yisrael, but all may not remove others from Eretz Yisrael, as one may not coerce one’s family to leave. Likewise, all may force their family to ascend to Jerusalem, and all may not, i.e., no one may, remove them from Jerusalem. Both men and women may force the other spouse to immigrate to Eretz Yisrael or to move to Jerusalem. The mishna lists other halakhic distinctions between various geographic locations: If one married a woman in Eretz Yisrael and divorced her in Eretz Yisrael, and the currency of the sum in the marriage contract was not specified, he gives her the sum of her marriage contract in the currency of Eretz Yisrael. If one married a woman in Eretz Yisrael and divorced her in Cappadocia, where the currency holds greater value, he gives her the currency of Eretz Yisrael. If one married a woman in Cappadocia and divorced her in Eretz Yisrael, he likewise gives her the currency of Eretz Yisrael. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: He gives her the currency of Cappadocia. Everyone agrees that if one married a woman in Cappadocia and divorced her in Cappadocia, he gives her the currency of Cappadocia.

נֹתֵן לָהּ מִמָּעוֹת אֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל. הָדָא אָֽמְרָה. שֶׁמַּטְבֵּעַ אֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל יָפֶה מִכָּל־הָאֲרָצוֹת. הָדָא מְסַייְעָא לְמָאן דְּאָמַר. כְּתוּבַּת אִשָּׁה מִדִּבְרֵי תוֹרָה. וּדְלֹא כְרַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל. דְּתַנֵּי. כְּתוּבַּת אִשָּׁה מִדִּבְרֵי תוֹרָה. רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹמֵר. אֵין כְּתוּבַּת אִשָּׁה אֶלָּא מִדִּבְרֵי סוֹפְרִים.
“He pays her in coin of the Land of Israel.” This implies that the coins of the land of Israel are the best of all countries151Since Palestine had no imperial mint in Talmudic times, this cannot refer to Roman coins in circulation, which were coins in the Land but not of the Land. It must refer to the minting standards of the two revolts whose Jewish coins were intended to be used for the Temple tax and as such were of full weight, i. e. the “holy sheqel”. This also must be the meaning of the statement in the Tosephta 12:6, cf. S. Lieberman, תוספתא כפשוטה כתובות p. 389.. This supports him who says that a woman’s ketubah is from the words of the Torah152Because it has to be paid in terms of biblical coin standards., against Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel, as it was stated153Babli 10a, in a first version. In the second version and in 110b, he is reported to consider ketubah a biblical obligation. In Mekhilta dR. Simeon bar Ioḥai p. 209, a Babylonian compilation in the opinion of J. N. Epstein, Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel is quoted as saying that ketubah has no fixed sum from the Torah; i. e., the institution is biblical, “the mohar of virgins”, but the amount and all details are rabbinical.
The Babli follows the saboraic rule that practice always follows Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel in the Mishnah; a principle not known to the Yerushalmi and certainly rejected here. Cf. also 1:2, Notes 112–120, 4:8 (29a 1. 30), 4:12 Note 248; Yebamot 7:2 Note 63, 15:3 Note 63. For biblical status of ketubah, Mekhilta dR. Ismael, Mišpaṭim 17 (p. 308, ed. Horovitz-Rabin).
: A woman’s ketubah is from the words of the Torah. Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel says, a woman’s ketubah is only an institution of the Soferim154I. e., dating from Ezra and/or his successors..
נָשָׂא אִשָּׁה כּוּ׳. הָא גּוּפַהּ קַשְׁיָא: קָתָנֵי: נָשָׂא אִשָּׁה בְּאֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל וְגֵרְשָׁהּ בְּקַפּוֹטְקְיָא, נוֹתֵן לָהּ מִמְּעוֹת אֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל — אַלְמָא בָּתַר שִׁיעְבּוּדָא אָזְלִינַן. אֵימָא סֵיפָא: נָשָׂא אִשָּׁה בְּקַפּוֹטְקְיָא וְגֵרְשָׁהּ בְּאֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל, נוֹתֵן לָהּ מִמְּעוֹת אֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל — אַלְמָא בָּתַר גּוּבְיָינָא אָזְלִינַן! אָמַר רַבָּה: מִקּוּלֵּי כְתוּבָּה שָׁנוּ כָּאן. קָסָבַר כְּתוּבָּה דְּרַבָּנַן. רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹמֵר: נוֹתֵן לָהּ מִמְּעוֹת קַפּוֹטְקְיָא. קָסָבַר כְּתוּבָּה דְּאוֹרָיְיתָא. תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: הַמּוֹצִיא שְׁטַר חוֹב עַל חֲבֵירוֹ, כָּתוּב בּוֹ בָּבֶל — מַגְבֵּהוּ מִמְּעוֹת בָּבֶל, כָּתוּב בּוֹ אֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל — מַגְבֵּהוּ מִמְּעוֹת אֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל. כָּתוּב בּוֹ סְתָם, הוֹצִיאוֹ בְּבָבֶל — מַגְבֵּהוּ מִמְּעוֹת בָּבֶל, הוֹצִיאוֹ בְּאֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל — מַגְבֵּהוּ מִמְּעוֹת אֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל. כָּתוּב בּוֹ כֶּסֶף סְתָם — מַה שֶּׁיִּרְצֶה לֹוֶה מַגְבֵּהוּ. מַה שֶּׁאֵין כֵּן בִּכְתוּבָּה. אַהֵיָיא? אָמַר רַב מְשַׁרְשְׁיָא: אַרֵישָׁא, לְאַפּוֹקֵי מִדְּרַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל, דְּאָמַר כְּתוּבָּה דְּאוֹרָיְיתָא.
§ The mishna taught that if one married a woman in Eretz Yisrael and divorced her in Cappadocia, he must pay her the marriage contract in the currency of Eretz Yisrael. The same is true if he married her in Cappadocia and divorced her in Eretz Yisrael. The Gemara asks: This matter itself is difficult, i.e., there is an internal contradiction in the rulings provided by the mishna. The Gemara elaborates: The mishna first teaches that if one married a woman in Eretz Yisrael and divorced her in Cappadocia, he gives her the currency of Eretz Yisrael. Apparently, one follows the customs of the place of the lien, i.e., he pays with the currency of the location of the wedding, where the obligation came into force. Now, say the latter clause of the mishna: If one married a woman in Cappadocia and divorced her in Eretz Yisrael, he likewise gives her currency of Eretz Yisrael. Apparently, one follows the place of the collection of the money. Rabba said: The Sages taught here one of the leniencies that apply to a marriage contract. The leniency is that the husband pays with the less valuable currency of Eretz Yisrael in both cases, whether the wedding or the divorce occurred there. This is because the tanna of this mishna holds that a marriage contract applies by rabbinic law. § The mishna taught that Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says that if one married a woman in Cappadocia and divorced her in Eretz Yisrael, he pays her the marriage contract in the currency of Cappadocia. The Gemara explains that Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel holds that a marriage contract applies by Torah law, which means that its debt must be paid according to its highest possible value. Consequently, one follows the place in which the obligation was formed, which is the halakha for all deeds and contracts, and there is no room for leniency in this matter. § The Sages taught: With regard to one who produces a promissory note against another, if Babylonia is written in it, he pays it with the currency of Babylonia; if Eretz Yisrael is written in it, he pays it with currency of Eretz Yisrael. In a case where it is written without specification as to where the document was written, if he produced it in Babylonia he pays it with the currency of Babylonia and if he produced it in Eretz Yisrael he pays it with currency of Eretz Yisrael. If the note mentions money without specification of what type of coins are to be used, the borrower may pay it with any type of coin he likes, even the smallest denomination available. However, this is not the case with regard to a marriage contract. The Gemara asks: With regard to this last statement, that this is not the case with regard to a marriage contract: To which part of the baraita is this referring? Rav Mesharshiyya said: It is referring back to the first clause, that if the promissory note mentions Babylonia one pays with Babylonian currency. This indicates that one invariably pays based on the place where the document was written. The tanna adds that this principle does not apply to a marriage contract, as one pays based on the place where a marriage contract was written only if this would lead to a leniency, as explained above (Rid). This ruling comes to exclude the opinion of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, who said that that a marriage contract applies by Torah law and must always be paid in the currency of the place in which the obligation was first formed.

תָּנָא: הוֹאִיל וּקְנַס חֲכָמִים הוּא — לֹא תִּגְבֶּה אֶלָּא מִן הַזִּיבּוּרִית. קְנָסָא? מַאי קְנָסָא?! אֶלָּא אֵימָא: הוֹאִיל וְתַקָּנַת חֲכָמִים הוּא — לֹא תִּגְבֶּה אֶלָּא מִן הַזִּיבּוּרִית. רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹמֵר: כְּתוּבַּת אִשָּׁה מִן הַתּוֹרָה. וּמִי אָמַר רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל הָכִי? וְהָתַנְיָא: ״כֶּסֶף יִשְׁקֹל כְּמֹהַר הַבְּתוּלוֹת״: שֶׁיְּהֵא זֶה, כְּמוֹהַר הַבְּתוּלוֹת, וּמוֹהַר הַבְּתוּלוֹת כָּזֶה. מִכָּאן סָמְכוּ חֲכָמִים לִכְתוּבַּת אִשָּׁה מִן הַתּוֹרָה. רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹמֵר: כְּתוּבַּת אִשָּׁה אֵינָהּ מִדִּבְרֵי תוֹרָה, אֶלָּא מִדִּבְרֵי סוֹפְרִים! אֵיפוֹךְ. וּמַאי חָזֵית דְּאָפְכַתְּ בָּתְרָיְיתָא, אֵיפוֹךְ קַמַּיְיתָא? הָא שָׁמְעִינַן לֵיהּ לְרַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל דְּאָמַר כְּתוּבַּת אִשָּׁה מִדְּאוֹרָיְיתָא. דִּתְנַן, רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹמֵר — נוֹתֵן לָהּ מִמְּעוֹת קַפּוֹטְקְיָא. וְאִי בָּעֵית אֵימָא: כּוּלָּהּ רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל הִיא, וְחַסּוֹרֵי מִיחַסְּרָא, וְהָכִי קָתָנֵי: מִכָּאן סָמְכוּ חֲכָמִים לִכְתוּבַּת אִשָּׁה מִן הַתּוֹרָה. כְּתוּבַּת אַלְמָנָה אֵינָהּ מִדִּבְרֵי תוֹרָה, אֶלָּא מִדִּבְרֵי סוֹפְרִים, שֶׁרַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹמֵר: כְּתוּבַּת אַלְמָנָה אֵינָהּ מִדִּבְרֵי תוֹרָה, אֶלָּא מִדִּבְרֵי סוֹפְרִים.

§ A Sage taught in a baraita: Since payment of the marriage contract is a penalty instituted by the Sages, she may collect only from the husband’s land of the most inferior quality. The Gemara asks: A penalty? What penalty is there in a marriage contract? Rather, emend the baraita and say: Since it is a rabbinic ordinance and not a Torah obligation, she may collect only from the husband’s land of the most inferior quality. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: The marriage contract of a woman is an obligation by Torah law. The Gemara asks: And did Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel say that? But isn’t it taught in a baraita that it is written with regard to a seducer: “He shall pay money according to the dowry of virgins” (Exodus 22:16)? The Torah establishes that this fine will be like the dowry of a virgin, and that the dowry of a virgin will be like this fine, i.e., fifty silver sela, or two hundred dinars. From here the Sages based their determination that a woman’s marriage contract is an obligation by Torah law. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: The marriage contract of a woman is not an obligation by Torah law, but is by rabbinic law. The Gemara resolves the contradiction between the statements of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel: Reverse the attribution of opinions in this baraita. The Gemara asks: And what did you see that led you to reverse the attribution of opinions in the latter baraita? Reverse the attribution of opinions in the former, in the baraita, and say that Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel is the one who holds that the marriage contract is a rabbinic ordinance. The Gemara answers: The reason is that we learned that it is Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel who said elsewhere that the marriage contract of a woman is an obligation by Torah law, as we learned in a mishna (110b) that Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says that if a man marries a woman in Cappadocia, where the currency is more valuable, and he divorces her in Eretz Yisrael, he gives her payment for the marriage contract from the money of Cappadocia. From the fact that he is obligated to pay the marriage contract in the currency of the place where he undertook the obligation, apparently the marriage contract of a woman is an obligation by Torah law. And if you wish, say instead that the entire latter baraita is in accordance with the opinion of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, but the baraita is incomplete and it is teaching the following: From here, the Sages based their determination that a woman’s marriage contract in the case of a virgin is an obligation by Torah law. However, the marriage contract of a widow is not an obligation by Torah law but is an ordinance by rabbinic law, as Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: The marriage contract of a widow is not an obligation by Torah law but is an ordinance by rabbinic law.

נפקה מינה: סכום הכתובה

(ב) בְּתוּלָה, כְּתֻבָּתָהּ מָאתַיִם. וְאַלְמָנָה, מָנֶה. בְּתוּלָה אַלְמָנָה, גְּרוּשָׁה, וַחֲלוּצָה, מִן הָאֵרוּסִין, כְּתֻבָּתָן מָאתַיִם, וְיֵשׁ לָהֶן טַעֲנַת בְּתוּלִים. הַגִּיּוֹרֶת, וְהַשְּׁבוּיָה, וְהַשִּׁפְחָה שֶׁנִּפְדּוּ וְשֶׁנִּתְגַּיְּרוּ, וְשֶׁנִּשְׁתַּחְרְרוּ, פְּחוּתוֹת מִבְּנוֹת שָׁלֹשׁ שָׁנִים וְיוֹם אֶחָד, כְּתֻבָּתָן מָאתַיִם, וְיֵשׁ לָהֶן טַעֲנַת בְּתוּלִים:

(2) With regard to a virgin, her marriage contract is two hundred dinars, and with regard to a widow, her marriage contract is one hundred dinars. With regard to a virgin who is a widow, a divorcée, or a ḥalutza who achieved that status from a state of betrothal, before marriage and before consummation of the marriage, for all of these their marriage contract is two hundred dinars, and they are subject to a claim concerning their virginity, as their presumptive status of virginity is intact. With regard to a female convert, or a captive woman, or a maidservant, who were ransomed with regard to the captive, or who converted with regard to the convert, or who were freed with regard to the maidservant, when they were less than three years and one day old, their marriage contract is two hundred dinars, as their presumptive status is that of a virgin. Even if they were subject to intercourse when they were younger than that age, the hymen remains intact. And they are subject to a claim concerning their virginity.

רב יהודה אמר רב אסי כל כסף האמור בתורה סתם כסף צורי ושל דבריהם כסף מדינה

§ Rav Yehuda says that Rav Asi says: Every sum of money stated in the Torah without specifying that it is in shekels is referring to silver dinars of Tyrian coinage, which have a high value. And every mention of coins in statements of the Sages is referring to provincial coinage, which was worth roughly one-eighth of Tyrian coinage.
כסף צורי - היכא דכתיב שקל הוי סלע צורי דהוא ארבעה דינרי כדאוקי רבי יוחנן לעיל והיכא דלא כתיב שקל אלא כסף הוי דינר צורי: כסף מדינה - שמינית של כסף צורי והוא איסתירא סווסריאתא דאמרן לעיל:

ספר החילוקים, ז

אנשי מזרח כתובה שלהם כ"ה [25] כספים (ומוהר שלהם), ובני ארץ ישראל אומרים: כל הפוחת לבתולה ממאתים ולאלמנה ממנה הרי זו בעילת זנות.

(ז) וְצָרִיךְ לִכְתֹּב כְּתֻבָּה קֹדֶם כְּנִיסָה לַחֻפָּה וְאַחַר כָּךְ יִהְיֶה מֻתָּר בְּאִשְׁתּוֹ וְהֶחָתָן נוֹתֵן שְׂכַר הַסּוֹפֵר. וְכַמָּה הוּא כּוֹתֵב לָהּ. אִם הָיְתָה בְּתוּלָה אֵין כּוֹתְבִין לָהּ פָּחוֹת מִמָּאתַיִם דִּינָרִים וְאִם בְּעוּלָה אֵין כּוֹתְבִין לָהּ פָּחוֹת מִמֵּאָה דִּינָרִים [ד.] וְזֶה הוּא הַנִּקְרָא עִקַּר כְּתֻבָּה... וַחֲכָמִים הֵם שֶׁתִּקְּנוּ כְּתֻבָּה לָאִשָּׁה כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא תִּהְיֶה קַלָּה בְּעֵינָיו לְהוֹצִיאָהּ:

(ח) דִּינָרִים אֵלּוּ לֹא תִּקְּנוּ אוֹתָם מִן הַכֶּסֶף הַטָּהוֹר אֶלָּא מִמַּטְבֵּעַ שֶׁהָיָה בְּאוֹתָן הַיָּמִים שֶׁהָיָה שִׁבְעָה חֲלָקִים נְחשֶׁת וְאֶחָד כֶּסֶף עַד שֶׁיִּהְיֶה בַּסֶּלַע חֲצִי זוּז כֶּסֶף. וְנִמְצָא מָאתַיִם דִּינָרִים שֶׁל בְּתוּלָה חֲמִשָּׁה וְעֶשְׂרִים זוּזִין שֶׁל כֶּסֶף טָהוֹר וּמֵאָה דִּינָרִים שֶׁל בְּעוּלָה שְׁנֵים עָשָׂר זוּזִים וּמֶחֱצָה. וּמִשְׁקַל כָּל זוּז שֵׁשׁ וְתִשְׁעִים שְׂעוֹרוֹת כְּמוֹ שֶׁבֵּאַרְנוּ בִּתְחִלַּת עֵרוּבִין. וְהַדִּינָר הוּא הַנִּקְרָא זוּז בְּכָל מָקוֹם בֵּין שֶׁיִּהְיֶה מִן הַכֶּסֶף הַטָּהוֹר בֵּין שֶׁיִּהְיֶה מִמַּטְבֵּעַ אוֹתָן הַיָּמִים:

(7) [A man] must write a marriage contract (a ketubah) [for his wife] before their entry into the chuppah; only afterwards is he permitted to live with his wife. The groom pays the scribe's fee.
How much does [the marriage contract require him to promise to have paid to her in the event of his death or his divorcing her]? If the bride is a virgin, no less than 200 dinarim. If she is not a virgin, no less than 100 dinarim.18Rav Ovadiah of Bertinoro (Pe'ah 8:8) states that this is the sum of money required for a person to support himself for one year. This amount is called the fundamental requirement of the ketubah.
If the groom desires to add to this amount he may, [promising any sum,] even a talent of gold. The laws pertaining to this addition and to the fundamental requirement of the ketubah are the same with regard to most matters. Therefore, every time the term ketubah is used without any additional explanation, it should be understood to include the fundamental requirement of the ketubah together with the additional amount [promised by the groom].
It was our Sages19This point is a matter of debate, for there are certain opinions (among them that of Rabbenu Tam) that maintain that the obligation to pay the fundamental requirement of the ketubah stems from the Torah. Support for the latter opinion may be drawn from the wording commonly used in most Ashkenazic ketubot "200 silver zuz that are rightfully yours [as required by] the Torah." [Significantly, even the text of the ketubah in the standard printed texts of the Mishneh Torah (Hilchot Yibbum VaChalitzah 4:34) includes this phrase. Nevertheless, many authorities maintain that this is a printer's addition and not the Rambam's own words.]
Most authorities (including Rabbenu Asher) agree that the obligation to pay the fundamental requirement of the Ketubah is Rabbinic in origin. Nevertheless, the abovementioned phrase is traditionally included in the ketubah to teach us the value of the silver to which we are referring, as is explained in the notes on the following halachah.
who ordained the requirement of [writing] a ketubah for a woman. [They instituted this obligation] so that it would not be a casual matter for [her husband] to divorce her.20I.e., when the man understands that divorcing his wife will cost him a significant sum of money, he will think twice before doing so.

(8) [Our Sages] did not require that these dinarim be of pure silver. Instead, [their intent was] the coin [commonly used] in the [Talmudic] period, which was seven parts copper and one part silver. Thus, a sela (a coin worth four dinarim) contained half a zuz of [pure] silver.21The Ashkenazic authorities (even those who agree with the Rambam with regard to the Rabbinic origin of the fundamental requirement of the ketubah) differ with him regarding the value the man is required to pay [Tur, Ramah (Even HaEzer 66:6)]. According to these authorities, our Sages ordained that a man pay his virgin bride 200 zuz of pure silver. With regard to a bride who is not a virgin, however, they differ and maintain that the obligation is 100 zuz of the Talmudic period. In practice, however, the custom is to give such a bride half the sum given to a virgin (Beit Shmuel 66:14). And the 200 dinarim to be paid a virgin were equivalent to 25 zuz of pure silver, while the 100 zuz to be paid to a woman who had previously engaged in sexual relations was 12 and a half zuz [of pure silver].
The weight of each zuz is 96 barley corns, as explained at the beginning of [Hilchot] Eruvin.22Chapter 1, Halachah 12. According to most authorities, the equivalent of a dinar in contemporary measure is 4.8 grams. According to Rabbi Shneur Zalman of Liadi (Piskei Siddur), it is 5.1 grams. A dinar is universally referred to as a zuz, regardless of whether it was of pure silver or of the coins used in the [Talmudic] period.

We use cookies to give you the best experience possible on our site. Click OK to continue using Sefaria. Learn More.OKאנחנו משתמשים ב"עוגיות" כדי לתת למשתמשים את חוויית השימוש הטובה ביותר.קראו עוד בנושאלחצו כאן לאישור