Meir’s responsa and also in their copy out-of an effective responsum by Roentgen
Rabbi Meir b. Baruch of Rothenburg (Maharam, c.1215–1293) produces you to definitely “A Jew need certainly to honor their spouse more he remembers himself. If a person strikes a person’s partner, you ought to end up being penalized more really compared to striking someone. For 1 was enjoined to honor one’s spouse it is maybe not enjoined so you’re able to prize each other. . In the event that the guy lasts in the hitting their, the guy is excommunicated, lashed, and sustain the newest severest punishments, actually for the the quantity away from amputating his case. In the event that his spouse was prepared to deal with a divorce or separation, he need splitting up their and spend her the newest ketubbah” (Also ha-Ezer #297). He says one a female who’s hit because of the their partner was permitted a primary divorce or separation also to receive the money due their own in her relationships settlement. Their suggestions to cut off of the give out of a chronic beater from their other echoes what the law states from inside the Deut. –several, the spot where the uncommon discipline regarding cutting off a hands try applied so you can a woman which tries to save your self her spouse inside a great way that shames the newest beater.
In order to validate his thoughts, R. Meir uses biblical and you may talmudic topic to help you legitimize their views. At the end of so it responsum the guy discusses the court precedents because of it decision regarding the Talmud (B. Gittin 88b). For this reason he ends one to “in the fact in which she are ready to undertake [unexpected beatings], she usually do not accept beatings instead of an end in sight.” He things to the truth that a fist gets the possible so you’re able to destroy hence if the peace is actually hopeless, new rabbis should try to help you convince your in order to separation and divorce her out-of “his or her own free tend to,” however, if one proves hopeless, push him to separation their own (as well as invited 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 brightwomen.net web siteleri 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.
But not, they were overturned by the really rabbis in afterwards generations, starting 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).