DEUT1323 The Jewish tradition understands marriage to operate on three independent, but interlocking, planes: the contractual, the social, and the sacred. That is, marriage is not exclusively a matter of a contract between the two people or families, and it is not simply a social structure governed by the rules of society or a sacred event with solely religious meaning; it is all three at once. Moreover, each element affects the functioning of the others. The Covenantal Element of Jewish Marriage. Jewish marriage is, first, a covenant between the parties. Like a contract, a covenant is an agreement between two parties in which each gets something and gives something (lawyers call what each party gets “consideration”). Unlike a contract, though, a covenant is not designed to accomplish a specific task, after which it terminates; rather, those entering a covenant intend to create a long-term relationship. As a result, the terms of a covenant are generally less well spelled out than those of a contract, because it is harder to anticipate what might happen in a long-term relationship then it is taking on a particular task. Thus, a covenant of marriage in all cultures and legal systems is typically much shorter and much less specific than, for example, a contract to rent an apartment. Even though a covenant differs in important ways from a contract, it shares one important aspect that affects marriage--namely, the parties can create the covenant or dissolve it at will. Both the man and the woman must agree to be married for the marriage to be valid. As the Rabbis of the Mishnah and Talmud understood the Torah (specifically, Deuteronomy 24:1-3), a man must initiate a divorce but can simply throw the writ of divorce within six feet (four cubits) of the woman to deliver it and effect the divorce. After the enactment of Rabbeinu Gershom toward the end of the tenth century, however, the woman as well as the man must agree to a divorce to make it valid. (S.A. Even Hae’zer 66:3 gloss, 119:6 gloss. Maimonides (twelfth century) still accepts the validity of a divorce against her will: M.T. Laws of Divorce 1:2). Even in the time of Torah, as far as we can tell, and certainly by the time of the later Mishnah and Talmud, if both members of a couple agree to a divorce, they need not supply a justification for dissolving their marriage to judges or other officials; The covenantal nature of marriage enables them to create and dissolve their marriage at will. “The School of Shammai says, “A man may not divorce his wife unless he has found something improper in her, as it is said, ‘because he finds something obnoxious about her’” (Deuteronomy 24:1). But the School of Hillel says, “Even if she spoiled a dish for him, as it is said, ‘because he finds something obnoxious about her.’ Rabbi Akiva says, “Even if he found another more beautiful than she is, as it is said, ‘She fails to please him’”. Mishnah, Gittin 9:10. As late as 1970, all American states except Nevada required that a divorcing couple justify their divorce as a response to adultery, insanity, imprisonment, or some other communally accepted reason for the couple to separate. In contrast, the covenantal nature of Jewish marriage had enabled couples to divorce simply for “irreconcilable differences” almost two thousand years earlier.