Halakhah for Sanhedrin 44:1

From the laws of the commandment is, for example, that which they, may their memory be blessed, said (Sanhedrin 22b) that the prohibition of growing locks with the common priests is only at the time of entering the Temple. But anytime that the common priest does not enter the Temple, he is not [transgressing] the prohibition of growing locks at all. But because the high priest is constantly in the Temple, he is always forbidden to grow locks - as if you were to say, that if by way of duress he stays outside of the Temple a few days, he is nonetheless obligated to not grow locks. And how [long] is the growing of locks? Thirty days, like the nazirite - as undifferentiated naziriteship is no less thirty days. And the rest of its details are elucidated.

It is from the roots of the commandment [that it is] since the essence of good in a person is that he have thoughts of purity and cleanliness - for after the thoughts are the deeds of bodies drawn. Therefore it is fitting for the highest servant to cling to a woman who has never fixed her thought towards another man besides him who is Holy of Holies. And through that, the seed that God, may He be blessed, gives him from her will be pure and clean; fitting to serve in holiness. And lest you say, "And who knows if the virgin has also fixed her thought towards a man besides him and set her eyes on another," the answer to this is that for as long as the thought has not gone from the potential to the actual, she is not disqualified. But anytime she had intercourse with him, she is disqualified. And even though they, may their memory be blessed, said (Yevamot 59a) that when she becomes an adult, she is prohibited to him, the matter is that once she has matured so much, the thought of her impulse is only evil; and perhaps she fixed her thought towards another. And from when she is an adult, her evil thought counts as an act. And so [too,] from this reason did they say (Yevamot 59a) that if she was widowed from betrothal - even as a minor - she is forbidden to the [high] priest. As from when the act of designation (kiddushin) was done with her, she already fixed her thought towards another man via the act of betrothal and was [so] disqualified - as an act disqualifies even with minors, and thought [does] with adults. And likewise they said (Yevamot 59a) that if she had intercourse not in her (customary) way, she is also disqualified - as she already did a big act, even though her virginity (hymen) is intact. And so [too,] they said (Yevamot 59a) that even [if she is one] struck by wood (on her hymen), she is disqualified. And the reason with her is apparently that she will not fix her thought greatly on the high priest. As once she lost her virginity, she does not cut (form) a strong covenant with a man ever. And [this is] similar to that which they, may their memory be blessed, said (Sanhedrin 22b) that a woman only cuts a covenant with one who 'makes her a vessel' - and behold, this one did not 'make her a vessel.' However they, may their memory be blessed, were not very stringent with these [laws], and they said (Yevamot 60a) that if he married an adult or one struck by wood, he keeps [the marriage], ex post facto.

It is from the roots of the commandment [that] since woman was created to help man and she is like a beloved vessel for him - and like the matter that they, may their memory be blessed, said (Sanhedrin 22b), "A woman only makes a covenant with the one who makes her into a vessel" - since that is the case, it was from His will, blessed be He, that anytime his soul be sick of this vessel, that he should put her out of his house. And for this reason, there are some of our Rabbis that say in the gemara (Gittin 90a) that he can divorce her even if she burnt his cooked food - meaning to say, even for a small thing - since she is only like a valuable vessel in the home. And there are some of them that say that since this vessel is in His image and His likeness, and God granted to her - for his need and his honor - eyes to see, ears to hear and an intelligent soul, it is only fit for him to put her out and send her away from him for a large claim, and as the matter that is stated in the verse, "because he finds something lewd about her." However, according to everyone, if he finds a big thing, it is fit for him to divorce her for the reason that I mentioned - since she was only created for his sake. And since she is a bitter spirit for him and his soul despises her, he is under no compulsion to be with her in any case (as do some of the nations, who make a covenant with a woman [that is] a strong covenant until [one of them reaches] the grave below; and [so] she does not fear separation if she is licentious in his eyes and destroys everything in the house and burns everything that he has with fire - from the heaps to the standing grain to the olive grove). Nonetheless, the Torah commanded us that when we send her away, that he not send her away with speech alone, lest this be a stumbling block for us and it become a snare - that there be licentiousness among our nation, such that the adulterer claim that her husband divorced her; and also that divorce be very prevalent. Accordingly, now that we have been obligated to write the words in a book and to have witnesses testify, any [woman] that claims to be divorced, must show a deed [to that effect]. And there is also [another] benefit in the matter - as through this, sometimes the man will calm down and regret from [wanting to] divorce her. And 'great is peace.'