English translation — תצא ב

A.

In the present sedra¹

it is discussed about the matter of the get,

which cuts off a wife from her husband and the Torah calls a get by the name "sefer keritut" — in which one finds two opposite extremes:

On the one hand,

because it is a "

(sefer)

keritut" the get must be written²

in such a manner that it should not contain any conditions that leave over any connection between the husband and the wife,

because the get must be a "davar hakoret beino uveinah"³

But on the other hand,

from that which it is called "sefer",

one learns that a get must have ruling,

and it must be "its length greater than its width",

just like a Torah scroll⁴

— which Torah is indeed as the Rambam says — "in a clear language and a short way"⁵

— in his halachah — Mishneh Torah: the entire Torah was given to make peace in the world⁶,

making unity.

And even more: from the word "sefer" one learns out that the entire get,

from its beginning until its end,

must be written on one single sheet,

for "one sefer said the Merciful One and not two or three sefarim"⁷

— which such a law of "unity" does not exist even in a Torah scroll.

B.

The same two extremes are also found in connection with the number of lines of a get,

and this is learned from the two words "sefer kerisus" together:

From that a get is called "sefer kerisus",

it follows that the custom is that it should have twelve lines,

"like the measure of twelve lines that separate between the four books of a Torah scroll"⁸

— the measure of

(a break and)

"kerisus" that is in a "sefer

(Torah)

That also in this one sees not only the matter of cessation and cutting off,

but also the matter of unity — because the entire Torah

(and especially the four first books which "Moshe said from the mouth of the Almighty"<sup>9</sup>)

is indeed one Torah.

3.

The matter of "unity" that exists in a get — although its matter is indeed cutting off — expresses itself also in the connection of divorce with betrothal:

The concept and purpose of kiddushin is — "and they shall be one flesh"<sup>10</sup>,

and the concept of divorce is — excision,

"cutting between him and her",

And nevertheless we see<sup>11</sup>,

that the law of kiddushin — "a woman is acquired in three ways,

with money, with a document, and with intercourse"<sup>12</sup>

— we learn from the verses that are in the section of divorce<sup>1</sup>

: money and intercourse from "When a man takes a woman and marries her, and it will be if she does not find favor in his eyes etc."

(money from "when a man takes",

and intercourse from "and marries her")<sup>13</sup>,

and a document we learn from "and she goes out and she becomes" — "he equates becoming to going out,

just as going out is with a document, so too becoming is with a document"<sup>14</sup>.

And just as in the Written Torah the "three ways" of kiddushin are placed in the section of divorce — although they are two opposites — so too in the Oral Torah,

the conclusion and seal of tractate Gittin is a matter that is contrary to divorce¹⁵

The conclusion of the Mishnayos is "Beis Shammai says: A man should not divorce his wife unless he finds in her a matter of immorality",

and even according to Beis Hillel who say that he may divorce "even if she burned his dish" — it is only by a second marriage, but by a first marriage Beis Hillel also hold — as the conclusion of the Talmud in the Gemara¹⁶

— that "whoever divorces his first wife, even the altar sheds tears for him",

therefore "a man should not divorce his first wife unless he finds in her a matter of immorality"¹⁷.

And even more: even then,

"it is not proper for him to hasten to send away his first wife" rather "he should make a thorough investigation, perhaps¹⁸

he will not need to divorce her"*¹⁸.

4.

The concept that opposes divorce that exists in Gittin,

is not only at the end of the tractate but also at the beginning and head of the tractate — "He who brings a get from overseas etc.":

Which at first glance is very not understood: In Gittin there is a great multitude of laws that pertain to every get: both regarding the actual concept of get and its arrangement — how the get must be written etc.; how the husband must give the get to the wife etc. etc. — and before all of this: when does it even have a place to speak about gittin,

When may one divorce — when "he found in her a matter of nakedness"¹⁹

; or even merely "And it will be if she does not find favor in his eyes"²⁰

(Which the law,

although it does not pertain to the actual concept of divorce,

should have come, as mentioned, right at the beginning,

as an introduction,

before the laws of get and divorce²¹,

because in the cases where the law is that "he shall not divorce",

then,

for the most part,

the entire reality of get and divorce will not come about²²)

Further, there are the laws of agency — "All are fit to bring the get except for a deaf-mute, an imbecile, and a minor, etc."²³.

That these laws are already merely side details,

which are not from the essence of the matter of the get and divorce,

and they are not relevant in every get,

except in a case when the husband divorces through an agent.

Among the laws of agency itself,

there is a law,

that if the agent brings a get from overseas he must say "In my presence it was written and in my presence it was signed."

That this law is an individual detail in the matter of agency in divorce,

and it is an uncommon thing.

Because generally the husband and the wife are found

(in one place,

and even in a case when they are not in one place,

they are however)

in proximity of place — but that the husband should be entirely overseas is a rare case²⁴.

So why should the tractate Gittin begin specifically<sup>25</sup>

with "He who brings a get from overseas",

which is merely

(a)

a particular law,

(b)

among the laws of agency in divorce,

not in the essence of the get,

and

(c)

an uncommon thing*<sup>25</sup>?

So the explanation in this is,

that Rabbeinu HaKadosh chose

(among all the laws of gittin)

to begin the tractate with "He who brings a get from overseas" — because the entire

(reason and)

beginning of the matter of divorce

(in the inner aspect of matters)

is — "overseas",

as follows.

That also in this one sees how in Gittin was inserted the opposite of divorce: if not for the matter of "beyond the sea" the entire matter of divorce is not relevant.

And the matter expresses itself also in that the conclusion of the tractate

(in the part of the Mishnah)

is "A man should not divorce his wife unless he finds in her a matter of indecency etc." — although,

as said,

the tractate seemingly should have begun with that Mishnah — because with this our Rebbe hints,

that after all the matters of the entire tractate Gittin,

there still remains the foundation that "he should not divorce etc."

5.

The explanation of all this:

A man and woman below with all their details,

are in the likeness of — and they derive,

as it were — from the Holy One, blessed be He, and the Congregation of Israel, who are called man and woman²⁶.

So too the matter of betrothal and divorce with man and woman below derives from the aspect of "betrothal" and

(like²⁷)

"divorce"

(as it were)

that exists between the Holy One, blessed be He, and the Congregation of Israel:

At the time of the giving of the Torah,

was the "betrothal"*²⁷

— also like the wording of the blessing of the commandments²⁸

"Who sanctified us with His commandments"

(from the language of betrothal²⁹),

And afterwards,

in the time of the exile,

was the matter of divorce,

as the Gemara says³⁰

"An eternal answer the assembly of Israel returned to the prophet etc. A woman whose husband divorced her, does the one have any claim against the other?"

What in this is not understandable: the law regarding a get is,

that in order that through the giving of the get the divorce should take effect,

the get must go out from the domain of the husband and come into the domain of the wife³¹.

So it is difficult in this matter of the divorce of Knesset Yisrael from the Holy One, blessed be He: since the Almighty is everywhere,

so it is not possible that the "get" should go out from Him — so how is the matter of divorce applicable Above?

And although the Gemara there³²

does indeed conclude,

that to the claim of Knesset Yisrael the Almighty answers "Where is the bill of divorce of your mother which I sent, etc."³³

— it is, however, not understandable the earlier statement of the Gemara,

that the claim of Knesset Yisrael "A woman whose husband divorced her, etc." is a conclusive answer.

How can it be?

Then the question is answered with that the beginning of tractate Gittin

(that the laws of divorce below take themselves,

as above,

from the matter of divorce above)

is "He who brings a get from overseas": since that the husband, this Holy One, blessed be He, finds Himself in overseas³⁴

— the Holy One, blessed be He, ascends higher and higher³⁵

— and here below He does not find Himself in revelation,

<i> </i>therefore the matter of divorce is applicable

(regarding the Congregation of Israel etc.,

consequently the matter can be between a man and his wife below)³⁶.

But nevertheless,

since that the matter that "her husband went overseas" is only in revelation,

but in concealment it is indeed "And I will surely hide My face, says the Lord"³⁷,

that also in this "hiding I will hide" there is the "I"³⁸

— therefore,

in the inwardness of the matter,

it is not a matter of divorce, heaven forbid — "What is this bill of divorce" etc.

6.

The concept of the husband of this one, the Holy One, blessed be He, went overseas,

comes

(like all matters above,

which derive from what Jews do)

from the fact that Jews are in a state of "overseas".

The explanation of "overseas" literally is — a place that is far from the Land of Israel,

and not merely far in area,

but there are special difficulties in coming from there³⁹

and Torah gives as an example

(which proves that this is the "point" of the difficulties)

"overseas",

that in between there is a sea that separates, which a person cannot cross by his own power,

and even not by,

the mediation of a living being; and in order that the person who finds himself overseas should come to the Land of Israel,

he must arrive at a ship and the like.

What do these matters mean in spirituality?

The concept of Eretz Yisrael and of Jews, a land of desire⁴⁰

from G-d — is as the Midrash says⁴¹

"Why is its name called 'land'? Because it desired to do the will of its Owner."

And when a person is "far" from this will,

and the distance is in a manner <i>such</i> that by his own power

(from the desert that is in man)

he cannot reach the will — and not only that he cannot reach it with the power of his <i>intellect</i>

(the advantage of the speaking species),

but

Also not with the power of his attributes

(the aspect of animate and vegetative⁴²),

because his intellect and attributes are distanced by the sea of the Other Side — he then stands in a state of "the province of the sea."

And since "Know what is above — from yourself"⁴³,

that all matters above derive from "from yourself" — through this he causes that also above⁴⁴,

the husband goes

(this is the Holy One, blessed be He)

to the province of the sea.

And therefore tractate Gittin begins with "He who brings a get from overseas",

because the possibilities and reason for the entire matter of "divorce"

(above,

from which the matter of gittin below is drawn down)

is — that which the husband, the Holy One blessed be He, finds Himself overseas.

7.

One could nevertheless think,

that since the husband finds himself overseas,

which makes it "possible" that the "get" should go out of his domain,

then indeed Jews were divorced in truth, heaven forbid, from the Above —

Says about this the Mishnah,

that the agent who brings the get from overseas,

he must say "in my presence it was written and in my presence it was signed"; he himself must testify that he is not the divorcer,

but that he was sent from the husband,

4.

5.,

that the nations of the world and the

(kings)

their ministers,.

who openly they drove out the Jews into exile

(and also the nations among whom Jews are in exile later)

know⁴⁵

(from the side of their ministers above),

that they themselves have no mastery over Jews; that they are no more than "agents" through whom the Most High drove out — divorced — Jews into exile⁴⁶,

And since it is so,

it consequently turns out,

that the "get" never left the domain of the husband,

and consequently it is not a get — "This is a book of cutting off" etc.

8.

In order to understand the two above-mentioned matters regarding the divorce of Knesset Yisrael — that in revelation it is a matter of "a woman divorced by her husband" and in inwardness it is "a book of cutting off" etc. — one must first explain a fundamental in the matter of the betrothal of the Holy One, blessed be He, with Knesset Yisrael.

The law regarding betrothal is,

that although the betrothal itself must come specifically from the man

(and if the woman gives the money of betrothal and says "Behold I am betrothed to you,"

she is not betrothed⁴⁷)

— it must however be with her consent,

and one cannot betroth a woman against her will⁴⁸.

And so it was also regarding the betrothal of the Most High who betrothed His people Israel at the time of the Giving of the Torah: that beforehand "He coerced them like an overturned mountain"⁴⁹,

that the Most High revealed His love for Jews,

the "I have loved you, says the Lord"⁵⁰,

in order⁵¹

to awaken in them the love for Him,

and the self-nullification⁵²

of the precedence of "we will do" to "we will hear" — that the Jews should want to become "betrothed" to the Most High.

And although that the awakening of love and self-nullification among the Congregation of Israel came from the side of the revelation from Above and not from their own side⁵³

— this however awakened love and will in them,

until that "the precedence of we-will-do to we-will-hear" became the reality of a Jew,

of every Jew⁵⁴.

And according to the ruling of the Rambam⁵⁵,

that every Jew,

even when he stands in a most lowly state

(that not only is the revelation of G-dliness not luminous in his soul,

but on the contrary etc. — it is however)

"desires he is to do all the commandments and to distance himself from transgressions".

It is only that the desire is by him in concealment,

and in order that this should come out in revelation,

he needs to come to that one should coerce him.

And exactly as this is regarding the desire of Jews for the Most High,

that this is the very essence of a Jew,

which this is higher than revelation,

and it is always in perfection — also when in revelation he does not want to fulfill the will of the Holy One blessed be He because "his evil inclination overpowered him" — so too is it, as it were, regarding the love of the Most High for Jews,

that it is connected with His entire essence, as it were,

and therefore also at the time when it is not luminous in revelation,

until that He has, as it were, sent them away,

He finds Himself with them,

and consequently "what bill of divorcement etc.",

as above.

It is only,

that as long as the love is in concealment

(is from the aspect of revelation)

it is called a woman divorced by her husband; but at the time that the essential love is revealed

(through that which "with a hand⁵⁶

of strength etc. I will reign over you")

— one does not need new betrothal,

rather the divorce is nullified from its beginning — "This is the book of divorce" etc.

That this is also the explanation in the statement of the Gemara⁵⁷

in connection with that which the Almighty will return to Jews,

despite the prohibition "Her first husband who sent her away may not take her again etc.",

that this is from the aspect of that which "Great is repentance which pushes aside a negative commandment of the Torah" — because from the aspect of the matter of repentance

(which is higher than Torah),

it is revealed that from the very beginning there was no divorce at all⁵⁸.

9.

As mentioned above,

the will of the Supreme One for Jews and of Jews for the Supreme One exists also during the time of exile,

when in externality and revelation it is a matter of "a woman who was divorced by her husband",

because the will is connected with the essence of the Supreme One and with the essence of Jews — and in "essence" no change can apply.

And based on this it is understandable,

that the "divorce" that is during the time of exile,

is not only an external matter and not in inwardness G-d forbid,

but even deeper: through the fact that also during the time of exile the Supreme One is not satisfied with the divorce,

"the altar sheds tears over him"⁵⁹,

until the Supreme One says "hated is the one who sends away"⁶⁰

— through this is revealed the connection of the Supreme One with Jews much more than it was before the divorce.

Because previously one could think that the bond between them is only a love that is dependent on something — fulfillment of Torah and mitzvos; during the time of exile it is revealed that there is — in addition to the aforementioned and primarily a love that is not dependent on something —

(which)

is not nullified; one sees that this is an essential matter.

And this is what the conclusion and seal of tractate Gittin

(that "everything follows the signature"⁶¹)

is "and she is your companion and the wife of your covenant" — because the inner content of Gittin

(above)

is to express how Jews are "the wife of Your covenant" of the Most High,

that the concept of "covenant" is essential connection.

10.

And this is also the explanation why a get must be "one document,

and not two or three documents",

which is an even greater unity than the unity of a Torah scroll

(as above section 1)

Because the unity that came revealed from the side of the Giving of the Torah,

since the preface of "we will do and we will hear" by Jews came from the side of the awakening of the supernal love and not from their own side,

it did not take away their essence,

and consequently also not the essence above,

And since in revelations there are changes and divisions,

therefore there is also a Torah scroll on divided sheets and parchments,

But not so in the time of exile,

when Divinity is not revealed openly and Jews are in a state of "the country across the sea" — there is a sea that separates between them and "the Land of Israel",

and nevertheless they fulfill the commandments with acceptance of the yoke and self-sacrifice,

because Divinity is their very essence — through this is expressed the true unity of the Most High with Jews as it is above form and division — "one book".

Yes.

The intention is indeed that also the unity of Jews with the Most High as it is above form should come to be revealed — therefore the order of the tractates,

that immediately after tractate Gittin comes tractate Kiddushin⁶²

Tractate Gittin,

although its conclusion and seal is indeed "and she is your companion and the wife of your covenant",

but the "covenant" is in such a manner that in externality and revelation it is "you have dealt treacherously with her",

and therefore immediately after that comes Tractate Kiddushin,

where it is again opened that "a woman is acquired to her husband"⁶³

— and in a manner of essential connection,

because the kiddushin comes already after the divorce and repentance — so that consequently both advantages are present: it is an essential connection,

and it is illuminating in revelation.

12.

And this is also the relevance of the portion of divorce to the matter of consolation — which is why it is written in Parshat Teitzei which is always read during the "Seven of Consolation":

First of all, the verse informs the inner content of exile and banishment,

that this is not a matter of separation, G-d forbid,

but on the contrary, it is a "bill of divorce",

that in inwardness the "cutting off" is actually a matter

(by way of example)

of a "book"

(Torah)

until that it has even an advantage over a Torah scroll — it is one book,

But Jews argue,

that in revelation it is still a matter of "and he shall send her out of his house" — about this the verse says further "she shall go out etc. and she shall be",

that immediately after "she shall go out" comes "and she shall be"⁶²,

the betrothal after the divorce,

that then will be

(not only such a connection as before the exile,

but)

there will come in revelation the "one book",

In the true and complete redemption,

through our righteous Mashiach,

very soon.

(From the sicha of 20 Menachem Av 5719)