Meir’s responsa as well as in his backup out-of a beneficial responsum by R
Rabbi Meir b. Baruch regarding Rothenburg (Maharam, c.1215–1293) produces that “A good Jew need certainly to honor their spouse more he honors themselves. If an individual strikes an individual’s spouse, you ought to end up being punished much more seriously compared to hitting someone. For example was enjoined to help you prize your partner it is maybe not enjoined to prize one another. . In the event the he continues from inside the striking their particular, he are going to be excommunicated, lashed, and you may sustain the fresh new severest punishments, even with the the quantity away from amputating their case. In the event that their spouse was ready to accept a separation and divorce, he need to breakup their unique and you will spend their unique the newest ketubbah” (Even ha-Ezer #297). He states one to a female who is hit by the her partner is actually permitted an immediate separation and divorce and have the currency due their own within her relationships payment. His guidance to slice off of the hand out-of a chronic beater out of their fellow echoes the law from inside the Deut. –a dozen, where in fact the unusual discipline regarding cutting-off a hands are used to help you a lady just who tries to save your self their particular spouse within the a good way that shames new beater.
So you’re able to validate their opinion, Roentgen. Meir uses biblical and you can talmudic question to help you legitimize their opinions. At the end of which responsum the guy talks about new judge precedents for this decision on Talmud (B. Gittin 88b). Thus he concludes that “despite the way it is in which she is prepared to take on [unexpected beatings], she dont deal with beatings as opposed to an-end around the corner.” He things to the fact that a fist contains the prospective to kill and this when the comfort is actually impossible, this new rabbis need in order to convince him to divorce case their unique out of “his or her https://brightwomen.net/fi/jordanialainen-nainen/ own totally free tend to,” but if that proves impossible, force him to help you separation her (as well as desired legally [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.
But not, they were overturned from the most rabbis during the later on generations, beginning 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).