Meir’s responsa plus his copy of a good responsum by the R
Rabbi Meir b. Baruch out-of Rothenburg (Maharam, c.1215–1293) produces that “Good Jew need to award their wife more than he honors themselves. If an individual strikes an individual’s wife, you ought to getting penalized a whole lot more really than for hitting another person. For just one is enjoined in order to honor one’s partner but is not enjoined to prize one another. . In the event that he continues from inside the hitting their own, he might be excommunicated, lashed, and you can endure the newest severest punishments, actually with the the total amount away from amputating his case. When the his partner are prepared to deal with a breakup, he must separation her and spend their unique the newest ketubbah” (Actually ha-Ezer #297). He states that a female who’s struck by the their particular spouse was eligible to a primary divorce and receive the currency due their particular inside her relationship payment. Their suggestions to chop off the hand off a chronic beater of his other echoes what the law states during the Deut. –several, where in fact the unusual discipline regarding cutting-off a give is actually applied so you can a lady just who tries to rescue their own spouse into the a good method in which shames brand new beater.
To justify their opinion, R. Meir spends biblical and you will talmudic thing so you can legitimize their opinions. After so it responsum he talks about new legal precedents for it choice from the Talmud (B. Gittin 88b). For this reason he ends up one to “despite the scenario where she are willing to accept [unexpected beatings], she usually do not deal with beatings instead a finish around the corner.” He things to the fact a thumb contains the possible so you can destroy and that https://brightwomen.net/tr/sicak-koreli-kadinlar/ in the event the comfort was hopeless, this new rabbis need to help you convince him to separation their own out of “their own totally free often,” however if you to demonstrates hopeless, push your so you can divorce their own (as it is anticipate by-law [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.
Yet not, these people were overturned by the very rabbis for the later on generations, you start with R
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).