Meir’s responsa and also in his duplicate out of good responsum from the R
Rabbi Meir b. Baruch out-of Rothenburg (Maharam, c.1215–1293) writes that “A great Jew need award his partner more he honors himself. If an individual influences your wife, you need to end up being punished even more honestly compared to striking another person. For one is enjoined so you can award a person’s partner it is perhaps not enjoined so you can honor one another. . When the the guy continues in hitting her, the guy would be excommunicated, lashed, and you can experience the fresh severest punishments, also to the the quantity off amputating their case. When the his spouse is actually prepared to accept a split up, he have to divorce their unique and you can spend their own the brand new ketubbah” (Also ha-Ezer #297). He states that a lady who is struck by her husband are entitled to a direct divorce or separation and also to have the money due their unique in her marriage settlement. Their recommendations to slice off the hands from a habitual beater off their other echoes regulations for the Deut. –12, where the uncommon abuse regarding cutting off a hand are applied so you’re able to a lady exactly who attempts to help save their husband inside a beneficial way that shames the newest beater.
To justify their viewpoint, Roentgen. Meir uses biblical and talmudic question to legitimize his views. At the end of this responsum the guy discusses the newest court precedents for it decision regarding Talmud (B. Gittin 88b). Hence he stops that “even in https://brightwomen.net/fi/skotlantilaiset-naiset/ happening in which she was happy to take on [occasional beatings], she cannot undertake beatings instead an end in sight.” He things to the point that a digit contains the possible to help you kill and therefore if peace was hopeless, brand new rabbis need so you can encourage your so you can divorce their particular from “his or her own 100 % free will,” however, if one to proves impossible, force your to help you breakup their (as is welcome for legal reasons [ka-torah]).
This responsum is found in a collection of R. Simhah b. Samuel of Speyer (d. 1225–1230). By freely copying it in its entirety, it is clear that R. Meir endorses R. Simhah’s opinions. R. Simhah, using an aggadic approach, wrote that a man has to honor his wife more than himself and that is why his wife-and not his fellow man-should be his greater concern. R. Simhah stresses her status as wife rather than simply as another individual. His argument is that, like Eve, “the mother of all living” (Gen. 3:20), she was given for living, not for suffering. She trusts him and thus it is worse if he hits her than if he hits a stranger.
not, they certainly were overturned by most rabbis during the later generations, you start with Roentgen
R. Simhah lists all the possible sanctions. If these are of no avail, he takes the daring leap and not only allows a compelled divorce but allows one that is forced on the husband by gentile authorities. It is rare that rabbis tolerate forcing a man to divorce his wife and it is even rarer that they suggested that the non-Jewish community adjudicate their internal affairs. He is one of the few rabbis who authorized a compelled divorce as a sanction. Many Ashkenazi rabbis quote his opinions with approval. Israel b. Petahiah Isserlein (1390–1460) and R. David b. Solomon Ibn Abi Zimra (Radbaz, 1479–1573). In his responsum, Radbaz wrote that Simhah “exaggerated on the measures to be taken when writing that [the wifebeater] should be forced by non-Jews (akum) to divorce his wife . because [if she remarries] this could result in the offspring [of the illegal marriage, according to Radbaz] being declared illegitimate ( Lit. „bastard.“ Offspring of a relationship forbidden in the Torah, e.g., between a married woman and a man other than her husband or by incest. mamzer )” (part 4, 157).
