Our Mishna Amud Beis discusses a dispute between Beis Shammai and Beis Hillel regarding an “old Get”. An old Get is a Get that was written, but before it was given, the husband and wife were alone together. Beis Hillel is concerned that should they have momentarily reconciled, and then the Get was given sometime later, perhaps she got pregnant in between. If so, it would have the appearance of a child out of wedlock. Therefore, one should not divorce with an “old” Get. Bais Shammai is not concerned about this.
Tosafos (“Beis Shammai”) based on a Yerushalmi, says this is Beis Shammai and Beis Hillel in accordance with their positions regarding the permissibility of divorce, discussed in the last Mishna of Gittin (90a). Since Beis Shammai holds that one is only permitted to divorce if there are grounds to believe that adultery was committed, there is much less likelihood of reconciliation. After all, typically such a situation would not engender a sudden reversal. Therefore, Beis Shammai is not concerned that they were sexually intimate when they were alone, and so there’s no concern of a child appearing to be out of wedlock. On the other hand, since Beis Hillel holds that it is permissible to divorce even over irreconcilable differences, it is more likely that if they had been alone together, there might’ve been a temporary reconciliation leading to pregnancy, and with a Get written much prior, the appearance of a child out of wedlock.
This dispute between Shammai and Hillel is not so simple. Some poskim understand that the entire discussion is in regard to a second marriage because a first marriage is considered sacrosanct. This is based on a discussion in the Gemara (Gittin 90b) which quotes a verse in Malachi as follows:
״כִּי שָׂנֵא שַׁלַּח״ – רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: אִם שְׂנֵאתָהּ – שַׁלַּח. רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן אוֹמֵר: שָׂנָאוּי הַמְשַׁלֵּחַ.
The prophet Malachi states in rebuke of those who divorce their wives: “For I hate sending away, says the Lord, the God of Israel” (Malachi 2:16). Rabbi Yehuda says: The verse means that if you hate your wife, send her away. Do not continue living with a woman whom you hate. Rabbi Yoḥanan says: The verse means that one who sends his wife away is hated by God.
וְלָא פְּלִיגִי: הָא בְּזוּג רִאשוֹן, הָא בְּזוּג שֵׁנִי.
And the Gemara explains that they do not disagree. This statement is with regard to a first marriage, i.e., one should tolerate his first wife and not divorce her, and that statement is with regard to a second marriage, in which case the husband should divorce his wife if he hates her.
There are poskim that interpret this Gemara to mean that even Bais Hillel only argues with Beis Shammai by a second marriage (see Shulkan Arukh EH 119:3 and commentaries).
The Rokeach (Seder Nashim Gittin) makes a derash based on this. He says Malachi was a prophet regarding the second Beis HaMikdash. The second Beis HaMikdash is like a second marriage. Therefore, just like a second marriage does not require a major betrayal to justify ending it, so too the second Temple was destroyed, simply for the sin of Sinas Chinam, baseless hatred. On the other hand, the first temple was only destroyed when the Jews committed major betrayal, such as idolatry and murder.
We have discussed many times the parallels between God’s relationship with the Jewish people and a marriage. This kind of symbolism and imagery are greater than a metaphor; it is somehow or another, something basic, and real. The patterns of the relationship dynamics, sometimes stormy, sometimes irrational, are in a real way, an illumination of God’s relationship with us, as well as our sometimes strange and conflicted relationships with our spouses. How else can we explain this most histrionic and seemingly unbalanced statement of Moshe (Shemos 32:32):
וְעַתָּה אִם־תִּשָּׂא חַטָּאתָם וְאִם־אַיִן מְחֵנִי נָא מִסִּפְרְךָ אֲשֶׁר כָּתָבְתָּ׃
Now, if You will forgive their sin [well and good]; but if not, erase me from the record which You have written!”
If we were doing couples therapy on Moshe and God, I shudder to say what kind of diagnosis we would give Moshe! (By the way, or not so by the way, that is exactly why I don’t believe much in diagnoses. Because all they really are, are clusters and patterns of human behavior that all of us do. It is only “pathological“ when it is on the extreme. We all, at times, engage in extremes as well. Beware of labeling your spouse with some kind of pathology when all they are is just being human and having feelings.) Returning to our discussion about Moshe, we must wonder: Really, was this good communication skills? The answer is, at that time, Moshe was not being an erudite communicator, he was being emotional. He was wrapped up in a deep and complex relationship with God and the Jewish people. Don’t ever underestimate what it means to be human and what it means to have feelings. It seems that God does not underestimate this either.
Translations Courtesy of Sefaria, except when, sometimes, I disagree with the translation 
Do you like what you see? Please subscribe and also forward any articles you enjoy to your friends, (enemies too, why not?)