[8]One can surmise from the information gathered from the Mishnah (codified in 200 CE) that debates regarding limitations on a husband's right to divorce his wife were being considered. All would agree that a man who raped a virgin and then later, after paying a fine of fifty silver shekels to her father, married her was not permitted to divorce her "as long as he lives" (Deut 22:28f). The rabbis also agreed that "because of sterility" (m. Gittin 4:8), any man might divorce his wife. Furthermore: The House of Shammai [i.e., the disciples of R. Shammai] say, "A man should divorce his wife only because he has found some grounds for it in unchastity, since it is said, because he has found in her indecency in anything" (Deut 24:1). And the House of Hillel say, "Even if she spoiled his dish [of food], since it is said, because he has found in her indecency in anything" (Deut 24:1 with the emphasis shown). R. Aquiba (d. 135) says, "[A man may divorce his wife] even if he found someone else prettier than her since it is said, and it shall be [as] if she finds no favor in his eyes" (Deut 24:1) (m. Gittin 9:10). From this it can be seen that Deut 24:1 received quite a range of interpretations. The disciples of R. Shammai (1st cen. BCE) allowed divorce only in the case of adultery (a position reflected in Matthew's community). The rulings of R. Hillel (1st cen. BCE) and R. Aquiba illustrate how liberal some Jewish men were regarded their option for divorce. One can surmise that Jesus' sympathy with women may have been the leading cause for his hard line challenge to the self-serving inventions of male religious thinkers in his day.