Introduction to Deuteronomy 24:4: Legal Ethics and the Sanctity of the Land
Deuteronomy 24:4 presents one of the Torah’s more intricate marital laws, prohibiting a man from remarrying his former wife after she has married another man and become defiled. The structure of the verse integrates modal grammar (לֹא יוּכַל), legal causality, and theological rationale (“because she has been defiled,” “because it is an abomination before YHWH”). This verse is not only civil legislation; it also communicates a deep concern for holiness, purity, and the spiritual integrity of the land. The legal grammar contributes directly to the moral force of the passage.
לֹא־יוּכַ֣ל בַּעְלָ֣הּ הָרִאשֹׁ֣ון אֲשֶֽׁר־֠שִׁלְּחָהּ לָשׁ֨וּב לְקַחְתָּ֜הּ לִהְיֹ֧ות לֹ֣ו לְאִשָּׁ֗ה אַחֲרֵי֙ אֲשֶׁ֣ר הֻטַּמָּ֔אָה כִּֽי־תֹועֵבָ֥ה הִ֖וא לִפְנֵ֣י יְהוָ֑ה וְלֹ֤א תַחֲטִיא֙ אֶת־הָאָ֔רֶץ אֲשֶׁר֙ יְהוָ֣ה אֱלֹהֶ֔יךָ נֹתֵ֥ן לְךָ֖ נַחֲלָֽה׃
Analysis of Key Grammatical and Legal Constructions
1. לֹא יוּכַל בַּעְלָהּ הָרִאשׁוֹן – “Her first husband may not…”
- לֹא יוּכַל – Qal imperfect 3ms of יָכֹל + לֹא: modal construction meaning “may not” or “is not permitted to”
- בַּעְלָהּ הָרִאשׁוֹן – “her first husband”; noun in construct with the 3fs suffix and adjective “first”
This modal phrase introduces the legal prohibition. The verb יוּכַל is not about physical inability, but legal impossibility or prohibition. It establishes the tone of binding moral law, rather than pragmatic consequence. The possessive construction specifies the identity of the male subject: the first husband, who previously divorced her.
2. אֲשֶׁר־שִׁלְּחָהּ לָשׁוּב לְקַחְתָּהּ – “who sent her away, to return to take her”
- שִׁלְּחָהּ – Piel perfect 3ms of שׁ־ל־ח + 3fs suffix: “he sent her away” (i.e., divorced)
- לָשׁוּב – infinitive construct of שׁוּב: “to return” (purpose)
- לְקַחְתָּהּ – Qal infinitive with 2ms suffix + 3fs object: “to take her (again)”
This phrase defines the prohibited action. The sequence of infinitives describes a man returning with the intent “to take her” again as wife. The grammar shows deliberateness and intention, not accident or happenstance, making it a willful violation of divine boundaries.
3. אַחֲרֵי אֲשֶׁר הֻטַּמָּאָה – “after she was defiled”
- הֻטַּמָּאָה – Hophal perfect 3fs of ט־מ־א: “she was defiled (made impure)”
The passive Hophal form is significant. It implies that the state of impurity was acquired, not necessarily by sin, but by circumstance—i.e., her lawful remarriage. Yet, by divine legal standards, her new sexual union disqualifies her from returning to her former husband. This reflects a theology where marriage alters covenantal status irreversibly.
4. כִּי תּוֹעֵבָה הִוא לִפְנֵי יְהוָה – “for it is an abomination before YHWH”
- תּוֹעֵבָה – “abomination,” term used for serious moral or ritual offense
- לִפְנֵי יְהוָה – “before YHWH,” indicating divine disapproval
This explanatory clause supplies the theological rationale behind the legal restriction. The term תּוֹעֵבָה often signals actions that violate the holiness code or covenantal sanctity (cf. Leviticus). Remarrying the woman under such conditions is not merely frowned upon—it is morally repugnant to YHWH.
5. וְלֹא תַחֲטִיא אֶת־הָאָרֶץ – “and you shall not cause the land to sin”
- תַחֲטִיא – Hifil imperfect 2ms of ח־ט־א: “you cause [to] sin”
The Hifil verb here shows causative action: the man’s sin causes contamination or offense not only to individuals but to the land itself. The land is portrayed as a covenantal partner, sensitive to impurity (cf. Leviticus 18:25–28). Disobedience brings not just guilt but also defilement of the land, threatening the nation’s relationship with YHWH.
6. אֲשֶׁר יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ נֹתֵן לְךָ נַחֲלָה – “which YHWH your God is giving you as an inheritance”
This closing clause reminds the audience that the land is a gift from YHWH, not a possession earned. It strengthens the imperative to maintain its purity, since it is both a divine trust and covenantal symbol. This reinforces the logic that personal sin can have national and theological consequences.
Legal Syntax as Moral Safeguard: Deuteronomy 24:4 and Covenant Purity
This verse employs modal grammar, causative verbs, and passive defilement to draw a clear boundary around marital and sexual ethics in ancient Israel. The structure is as follows:
- Modal Prohibition: לֹא יוּכַל – “He may not”
- Purity Clause: הֻטַּמָּאָה – “She has become defiled”
- Theological Reason: כִּי תּוֹעֵבָה – “Because it is abomination”
- National Implication: לֹא תַחֲטִיא אֶת־הָאָרֶץ – “Do not make the land sin”
The verse represents not merely a social policy, but a theological safeguard: maintaining Israel’s spiritual and moral distinctiveness as they inhabit YHWH’s land.
Remarriage, Defilement, and Holiness: The Syntax of Separation in Deuteronomy 24:4
Deuteronomy 24:4 masterfully combines legal clarity with theological urgency. Through the use of modal syntax (לֹא יוּכַל), causative and passive verbs, and covenantal reasoning, it outlines a boundary that protects the integrity of marriage, moral order, and the holiness of the land. This is law not only for society but for sanctuary, reflecting the deep linkage between human fidelity and divine presence in the inheritance YHWH grants His people.
