Pisqa’ 268¹

1

“Should a man take²a woman, and mount her”³ (Dt.24:1).

This teaches that

a woman may be acquired⁴ with money.⁵

Now,we might reason [otherwise]:

Just as a Hebrew slave-girl,

who cannot be acquired by mounting,

may be acquired with money

[in purchase of her freedom]—

isn’t it reasonable that

a [free] woman, who is acquired by mounting,

should also be acquired with money?

Proof [for the opposing view] is provided

by the rule for the childless widow.⁶

For she is acquired by mounting,

[at the discretion of her brother-in-law,]

but may not be acquired with money.

Thus, don’t be surprised that

even though a free woman is acquired by mounting,

she may not be acquired with money!

[But] the Teaching states [the opposite]:

“Should a man take a woman and mount her” (Dt.24:1).

This teaches that

a woman is acquired [first] with money

[and the mounting is only a secondary act of acquisition].

2

“And mount her” (Dt.24:1)—

This teaches that

a woman is acquired by mounting.⁷

Now, reason might lead [to the opposite conclusion:]

Just as a childless widow,

who cannot be acquired with money,

may be acquired by mounting—

isn’t it reasonable that

a free woman, who is acquired with money,

should also be acquired by mounting?

Proof [for the opposing view] is provided

by the rule for the Hebrew slave-girl.

For she is acquired with money,

But may not be acquired by mounting.

Thus don’t be surprised that

even though a free woman is acquired with money,

she may not be acquired by mounting!

The Teaching states [the opposite]:

“And mount her” (Dt.24:1)—

This teaches that

a woman is acquired [primarily] by mounting.

3

Now, how do I know that

A woman is also acquired with a document?⁸

It’s only reasonable!

Just as money,

having no power to expel her [from a marriage],

can yet acquire her in marriage—

isn’t it only reasonable that

a document,

which can expel her [from a marriage],

should also have the power to acquire her in marriage?

Not at all!

If you apply the rule for money,

which can acquire consecrated items

or Second-tithe produce,

would you apply that same rule to a document,

which has no power to acquire either

consecrated items or Second-tithe produce?

The Teaching states:

“Then he shall write for her a writ of separation,⁹

and place it in her hand, and send her from his house,

so then she can go out and be with another man” (Dt.24:1-2)—

the verse compares her being with this one

to her going out from that one.

Thus, just as her going out from this one

requires a document,

so, too, her being with another one

also requires a document!

1. H:262-263;JN2:204-205.
2. Heb: yiqakh. The root, l-q-kh, can mean “to take up” an object or to “purchase/take in marriage”. In the present context, the meaning is obviously “to acquire for the purpose of marriage.”
3. Heb: ba`alah; the root, b-`-l, connotes “to rule over,” “to dominate,” “to possess,” as well as “to marry.” As a verb. bo`eil includes within its semantic range the physical act by which a man possesses a woman, whether or not marriage is the intention of the male partner.
4. Heb: niqneit; the root, q-n-h, has a broad range of meanings: “to acquire,” “to create.”
5. Cf. M. Qid. 1:1.
6. Heb: yevamah. This Hebrew term refers to the childless wife whose husband has died leaving no heir. Under the levirate rule, the surviving wife has the duty to marry her brother-in-law (the levir or yavam) and produce a child who can inherit the deceased. She can be released from this obligation at the discretion of the levir, who can divorce her by a public declaration, after which she is free to marry as she chooses. See Dt. 25:5-10 and Pisqa’ot 288-291.
7. Cf. M. Qid.1:1.
8. Heb: shtar. Cf. M. Qid.1:1.
9. Heb: sefer keritut The biblical “writ of separation” is the foundation of the rabbinic get (“document of divorce”). For details, see Pisqa’ 270.