CCAR RESPONSA
New American Reform Responsa
230. Signature on a Ketubah
QUESTION: At the signing of the ketubah, the witnesses are asked to sign in Hebrew or in English. In many instances they do not remember enough Hebrew to sign their name appropriately and must, therefore, copy the writing prepared by the rabbi. Is this an appropriate way of signing the ketubah? (Betty Blum, Pittsburgh PA)ANSWER: The significance of the ketubah has changed for us. It is, of course, one of three ways of indicating that a couple has been married: (a) The most common form featured a deed witnessed by two competent individuals and handed by the groom to the bride (Kid 9a; Shulhan Arukh Even Haezer 32.1-4). This has remained the essential covenant of the modern wedding. The document is akin to the modern ketubah signed by the two witnesses. (b) In addition, it was possible to effect a marriage through the transfer of an item of value (kesef) in the presence of two competent witnesses. This remains as part of the modern wedding in the form of giving a ring with the formula “harei at mequdeshet…” (Kid 2a, b; Shulhan Arukh Even Haezer 27.1). (c) Finally, marriage can be effected through intercourse (biah) preceded by a statement indicating the wish to take this woman as wife in the presence of two witnesses who saw the couple leave for a private place (Kid 9b; Shulhan Arukh Even Haezer 33.1). The last method was, of course, severely frowned upon by the rabbis, but, bediavad, it is certainly valid. Consent was, of course, necessary (Shulhan Arukh Even Haezer 42.1). Our ketubah details the nature of the relationship and we insist that it be egalitarian; traditionally it stipulated the financial and economic considerations of the marriage. Normally in the modern ketubah such matters are omitted. Among us, therefore, the ketubah is more symbolic than legal. Our wording has become standard and does not contain special stipulations. Irrespective of these considerations the signature on the ketubah indicates that two witnesses who have signed have been present and acknowledge that the wedding has occurred. If at a later time the wedding is questioned, the signatures attest to the fact that these two people were married. Any form of signature is valid as long as it has been made by an appropriate witness and that person can subsequently attest to the fact that he/she actually signed the document. I do not know of any instance in which the signature has been questioned because it was copied out, in fact in early periods when not all individuals were literate this must have occurred regularly. It would, therefore, be permissible for the witnesses of the wedding to sign their Hebrew name through copying the letters written for them by the officiating rabbi.February 1989
If needed, please consult Abbreviations used in CCAR Responsa.