1,602. The Guarantor of a Kesubah
Hilchos Ishus 17:9
One who guarantees a woman’s kesubah is not required to pay even if he confirmed the obligation by performing an act of acquisition. This is because he only intended to perform a mitzvah; he didn’t cause the woman a loss. However, if one guarantees his son’s kesubah and confirms the obligation by performing an act of acquisition, then he must pay. This is because a father accepts obligations for his son and voluntarily obligates himself. On the other hand, one who underwrites a kesubah must pay even if he didn’t confirm the obligation by performing an act of acquisition. This refers to one who tells a woman to marry a certain man on the basis that he (i.e., the one speaking) will provide the money for the kesubah. If he just guarantees it, he is not obligated unless he is the groom’s father. If a man divorces his wife whose kesubah was underwritten or guaranteed by the man’s father, he must take a vow prohibiting her to derive benefit from him, after which she can collect payment from the one who committed it. This is a precaution enacted to keep a couple from acting deceitfully by divorcing, collecting the money from the third party, and then remarrying.
Hilchos Ishus 17:10
Similarly, if a man consecrates his property and then divorces his wife, he must take a vow prohibiting her to derive benefit from him, after which she can collect from the one who redeems property from the Temple treasury. Again, this is a precaution designed to keep the couple from committing fraud against the Temple treasury. However, if a man divorces his wife and she goes to collect from people who purchased her husband’s property, he need not take a vow prohibiting her from benefitting from him. Rather, she takes the necessary oath and then is paid. Later, she can remarry her husband if she so desires. The reason for this difference is that buyers know that a man’s property is mortgaged to pay his wife’s kesubah; they cause themselves a loss by buying property that is so committed.