What Is Dat Moshe?

🖨 Print

The concepts of Dat Moshe and Dat Yehudit are central to the discussion of tzniut and hair covering for Jewish women. Dat Moshe is commonly understood to mean Torah level obligation, while Dat Yehudit is understood as the binding custom of Jewish women. In this article, we will discover that Dat Moshe is a more complex idea than it appears and through it, we can learn deep lessons that apply to Jewish marriage in the context of Torah behavior.

Understanding the Term

The term Dat Moshe is used to describe a situation in which a woman would forfeit her ketuba in the event of divorce. The Talmud states:

And these are examples of women who may be divorced without payment of their marriage contract: A woman who violates the precepts of Moses (dat Moshe), or the precepts of Jewish women (Dat Yehudit). The Mishna explains: And who is categorized as a woman who violates the precepts of Moses? This includes cases such as when she feeds him food that has not been tithed, or she engages in sexual intercourse with him while she is niddah, or she does not separate a portion of dough to be given to a priest [ḥalla], or she vows and does not fulfill her vows.¹

The Rashba explains that Dat Moshe refers to mitzvot from the Torah², as opposed to Dat Yehudit, which refers to accepted and binding customs regarding the appropriate behavior of women. Rashba explains that Dat Moshe does not refer to personal transgressions but rather to Biblical transgressions that a woman causes her husband. To illustrate, if a woman transgressed the Torah prohibition of eating kosher by eating non-kosher food, that would be a personal transgression. However, if she served her husband unkosher food, that would be a transgression of Dat Moshe and she would forfeit her ketuba.

Our Sages discuss the rationale behind her losing her ketuba as a result of these actions and conclude that this sort of behavior causes a loss of trust and affects the marriage in a deeply spiritual way³. If she is causing her husband to sin, who knows what else she might be doing? We see from this the central place of the wife’s role in maintaining the spiritual well being of the family and the power of her actions and choices.

Rashba explains that Dat Moshe does not refer to personal transgressions but rather to Biblical transgressions that a woman causes her husband. To illustrate, if a woman transgressed the Torah prohibition of eating kosher by eating non-kosher food, that would be a personal transgression. However, if she served her husband unkosher food, that would be a transgression of Dat Moshe and she would forfeit her ketuba.

Head Covering

The term Dat Moshe takes on a significant place in the understanding of the laws of head covering, as the continuation of the Mishna discusses if going out without a head covering is considered Dat Moshe or Dat Yehudit:

“Which is Dat Yehudit? She goes out and her head is uncovered”: Her head uncovered is a matter of Torah law! For it is written, “and he uncovers the head of the woman,” and [it is] taught from the beit midrash of Rabbi Yishmael: This is an admonishment [azhara] to the daughters of Israel that they not go out bare-headed. According to Torah law, a kalta [minimum head-covering] is considered proper; according to Dat Yehudit, even a kalta is also prohibited.⁴

Here we see that head covering is considered by Chazal to be a Torah level law. The source for this is in the mitzvah of Sotah and therefore one would think that it should be considered a transgression of Dat Moshe. The rabbis go on to resolve the above argument by explaining that the Torah level obligation refers to covering of a ‘kalta’- understood by the mefarshim to mean a minimal head covering of the top of the head – while Dat Yehudit required a fuller hair covering. This has halachic implications in the question of how much hair a married woman must cover.

But, given the understanding that Dat Moshe refers to transgressions the wife causes the husband, do we consider head covering to fall under this category? Certainly, hair covering seems like a personal mitzvah. The Rambam, however does consider this to be a transgression in Dat Moshe and he writes:

These are the things that if she did one of them she violated dat Moshe: She went out in the marketplace and her head was bare [galu’i]…⁵

But other Rishonim disagree, including the Rosh and the Tur⁶. The reason for this is that they consider the transgression to be a personal one, while the Rambam considers it to be one that interferes in the marriage, due to the status of marriage that headcovering conveys to the beholder. Rav Moshe Feinstein and Rav Ovadia Yosef also discuss this in their respective teshuvot on the subject, and conclude that a woman who goes about bareheaded today would not forfeit their ketubah, due to how common this has become and say that this is not a reason to lose trust in one’s wife. Rav Willig points out the relevance of the husband’s feelings on the matter – if he doesn’t mind how his wife behaves, or if he himself transgresses the relevant laws, this would not be grounds for her losing her Ketuba.

This particular discussion illustrates that even our personal choices have an effect on our spouse, and underscores the importance of thorough and honest communication in marriage around halachic and hashkafic issues.

Marriage k’dat Moshe

As we have seen, the concept of Dat Moshe is one where the actions of the wife in the home and private life of the couple directly affect the husband’s connection to Hashem by causing him to sin inadvertently. The Tosefta addresses the issue as well, for both the husband and the wife, using a similar term – Dat Moshe ve’Yisrael (with Yisrael seemingly to be concurrent with Dat Yehudit).

“The one who …tells anyone things that are between her and her, he shall take her out and give her a written document because he did not behave with her according to the law of Moses and Israel. Likewise, she who goes out with her head disheveled, goes out with her clothes untied, and her heart is harsh toward her servants and her maids, toward her neighbors, goes out and spins in the market, washes and bathes in the bathhouse with every man, she shall go out without a written document because she did not behave with him according to the law of Moses and Israel.⁷

It appears that there is something essential in the way a couple needs to behave within their marriage that is reflected in the idea of Dat Moshe and Dat Yehudit. Therefore it should be of no surprise that the other place we find this terminology is in the wedding ceremony and in the Ketuba itself. Before placing the ring on his bride’s finger, the chatan pronounces the words ‘Harei at mekudeshet li k’dat moshe ve’Yisrael. “Behold, you are sanctified to me according to the Laws of Moshe and the People of Israel.” With this statement, the couple becomes joined in sanctified matrimony.

To be successful, a Jewish marriage requires Dat Moshe ve’Yisrael. Rav Solovetchik even describes that it is through the couple’s mutual halachic obligations that they are turned into a unit⁸. Jewish marriage is comprised, not just of a couple, but of a couple in tandem with Hashem. The discussion in the Mishna reminds us of our power and responsibility to our spouse. We can cause one to sin, but can also cause one to grow. Dat moshe ve’Yisrael should be the guiding principle in our marriages. Rabbi Sacks reminds of this when he writes:

“Marriage is not just living together, a temporary partnership for mutually beneficial ends…. It is the point at which the “I” of self meets the “Thou” of another, transforming us into something larger, more spacious, more generous and tender than we could ever be on our own. In marriage at its best you see humanity at its best, and in a loving home you can almost touch the Divine Presence.”⁹

Ketubot 72a ↩︎
Responsa of Rashba 5:246 ↩︎
Rav Mordechai Willig: https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/711683/Da’at-Moshe-v’Da’at-Yehudit ↩︎
Ketubot 72a-b ↩︎
Rambam Ishut 24:10-11 ↩︎
As quoted by Rav Mordechai Willig https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/711683/Da’at-Moshe-v’Da’at-Yehudit ↩︎
Tosefta Ketubot 57 ↩︎
Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik, ‘Marriage,’ in Family Redeemed: Essays on Family Relationships, ed. David Shatz and Joel B. Wolowelsky (New York: Toras HoRav Foundation, 2000) ↩︎
https://rabbisacks.org/archive/marriage-is-a-metaphor-for-our-relationship-with-god/
↩︎