Meir’s responsa plus in his duplicate off a good responsum because of the R
Rabbi Meir b. Baruch of Rothenburg (Maharam, c.1215–1293) produces one “A good Jew have to honor his spouse more than he remembers himself. If an individual impacts one’s spouse, one should be penalized more really than for striking another person. For example was enjoined so you can prize one’s partner but is perhaps not enjoined to help you honor the other person. . When the the guy lasts within the striking her, the guy shall be excommunicated, lashed, and you can experience the fresh new severest punishments, also on the the total amount regarding amputating his arm. When the his partner is actually ready to accept a breakup, he need divorce or separation their and you can shell out her this new ketubbah” (Also ha-Ezer #297). He states that a female that is struck by their own partner was eligible to a direct split up and to have the money owed their within her relationships settlement. His information to slice off the give out of a habitual beater out of their fellow echoes what the law states inside the Deut. –several, where in fact the strange discipline away from cutting-off a hands was used in order to a female who attempts to rescue their partner in an effective manner in which shames the brand new beater.
In order to justify his opinion, Roentgen. Meir spends biblical and talmudic procedure to help you legitimize their opinions. After that it responsum the guy talks about the new court precedents for it choice on Talmud (B. Gittin 88b). Hence he ends up that “even in the actual situation in which she try happy to undertake [occasional beatings], she cannot accept beatings rather than a finish around the corner.” The guy what to the fact that a digit contains the prospective to kill and this if the peace are impossible, the brand new rabbis need in order to encourage him so you can divorce or separation their particular off “his personal 100 % free usually,” in case you to proves hopeless, force your so you’re able to breakup her (as it is desired 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.
However, they were overturned because of the most rabbis from inside 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 https://brightwomen.net/tr/porto-riko-kadinlar/ 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).