<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Nov 12, 2007 4:40 PM, Zev Sero <<a href="mailto:zev@sero.name">zev@sero.name</a>> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div class="Ih2E3d">Richard Wolpoe wrote:<br></div><br><br>2. Who says there was a written kesuba? The Avos kept all the mitzvos,<br>including d'rabbanans like Eruv Tavshilin, so presumably there was a<br>kesuba, but Chazal seem to speak of written kesubos as a custom local
<br>to some places and not to others. And if there was a written kesuba,<br>who says it had to have the wife's name? After all, the wife has the<br>document, and if ch"v she has to collect on it she can just produce it
<br>and everyone knows who she is and who her husband was.<br><font color="#888888"><br>--<br>Zev Sero <br></font></blockquote></div><br><br>My essential source was a shiur by Rabbi Maordechai Aderet.<br><br>He posited that AL PI SOD sod Reuven was handicapped as a "pachaz kammayyim" at birth because the relationship that produced him was w/o benefit of kesubbah. I guess you COULD say my question is on HIS SHIUR and not on the event itself.
<br><br>But to be fair, the assumption is that there WAS a kesubah is also based upon the concept that Rashi says re: pilegesh was w/o kesubbah BEFORE mattan Torah etc. The common PRESUMPTION is that avos used kesubbah. The idea of anORAL kesubah is possible of course because after all the Mishna itself discusses it
<br clear="all"><br>-- <br>Kol Tuv / Best Regards,<br><a href="mailto:RabbiRichWolpoe@Gmail.com">RabbiRichWolpoe@Gmail.com</a><br>Please Visit: <br><a href="http://nishmablog.blogspot.com/">http://nishmablog.blogspot.com/
</a>