Meir’s responsa and also in their content away from good responsum from the R
Rabbi Meir b. Baruch away from Rothenburg (Maharam, c.1215–1293) writes that “Good Jew must prize his spouse more he celebrates himself. If a person influences a person’s wife, you should end up being penalized much more severely compared to hitting someone else. For example was enjoined so you can prize an individual’s spouse it is perhaps not enjoined so you can honor each other. . In the event the he continues within the hitting their own, the guy are excommunicated, lashed, and you may suffer the severest punishments, also to your extent from amputating his sleeve. If his spouse is actually happy to undertake a splitting up, the guy need to divorce case their particular and you may shell out their own the new ketubbah” (Also ha-Ezer #297). He says one to a female that is hit of the their own partner is actually permitted an immediate separation in order to have the money due her inside her relationship payment. Their advice to chop off of the give of a chronic beater out-of his other echoes legislation for the Deut. –several, where the unusual abuse regarding cutting off a give was used to help you a woman who attempts to save her spouse in the good manner in which shames the brand new beater.
In order https://brightwomen.net/no/sri-lankan-kvinner/ to justify his opinion, R. Meir spends biblical and you can talmudic situation so you can legitimize their views. At the end of this responsum the guy talks about the judge precedents for it choice from the Talmud (B. Gittin 88b). For this reason the guy stops you to definitely “even yet in the situation in which she are happy to take on [unexpected beatings], she you should never deal with beatings versus an-end around the corner.” The guy things to the fact a digit has got the potential so you’re able to destroy and that if peace is hopeless, new rabbis need so you’re able to encourage your to help you separation their own out of “his own 100 % free have a tendency to,” however if one shows impossible, push him to split up her (as is desired 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.
Yet not, they certainly were overturned from the very 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).