[Avodah] Why the woman is makneh herself

[Chana Luntz]

RMB writes:
> [I assume this is a quote, even though it's not indicated in 
> RSW's original. Otherwise he would be contradicting himself.]

No I don't think it is a quote, nor that he is contradicting himself
(not that I agree though).

> 
> >: I think the reason that the Torah required that a woman give up her
> >: right to exit a marriage of her own free will is because nashim 
> >daatan
> >: kalos...
> 
> : The gemara gives this reason for the takana that the husband has to
> : write a kesuba.
> 

I think what RSW is saying is that - on a rabbinic level, the takana of
the kesuba was made by chazal so that marriage should not be light in a
man's eyes, and he should not be tempted to cut and run too easily.  

RSW is postulating that the reason given by chazal for instituting the
kebuba is the reason of the Torah why women are locked into a marriage
and further that the reason that women and not men are locked in
according to the Torah is nashim daatan kalos - which I suspect RSW is
tranlating as "women are fickle".

As I have mentioned when the use of this phrase came up previously, it
is very rash to take a rabbinic concept which has a particular
application, and apply it more generally, especially in a Torah
shebiktav context in situations where chazal and the rishonim/achronim
never applied the concept.

As mentioned previously, the concept of nashim daatan kalos is used
specifically in relation to yichud situations (ie why a man can not
seclude himself with two women).  Note however that, at least according
to tosphos and the way we posken, this applies less to a married woman
whose husband is in the city than to anybody else (ie a man can seclude
himself with a married woman so long as her husband is in the city
because it can be assumed that the fear of her husband is upon her).

Of course RYBS famously did just this (ie take a rabbinic concept and
apply it to understand Torah situations) in the cas of tav lmeisiv tan
du.  But at least there he darshaned the posuk in Breishis which is
clearly stating something about women's general nature to arrive at this
result (not, as I have also said before, that that understanding of
Breshis seems to me to accord with the way the gemora uses the concept
of tan du).  But as a consequence, RYBS's understanding of the reason
for the situation that is puzzling RSW is that marriage is by definition
a benefit for a woman, not a chov - which seems to be where you are
coming from too - although I am not quite sure on what basis.


> Even without this, the fiscal system is biased in her favor. 

Can you explain this?

> Halakhah prevents the dishonest woman from collecting her 
> support and running.
> 
> Gut Voch!
> -mi
Regards 

Chana