Meir’s responsa and also in their content out of a good responsum by Roentgen
Rabbi Meir b. Baruch from Rothenburg (Maharam, c.1215–1293) produces one to “A beneficial Jew have to prize his partner over he celebrates himself. If an individual impacts one’s partner, one should getting punished way more honestly than for hitting someone else. For one is enjoined so you can prize an individual’s wife but is perhaps not enjoined in order to honor one another. . In the event the the guy continues when you look at the striking their, he is excommunicated, lashed, and you may endure the severest punishments, also for the the total amount away from amputating their sleeve. In the event that his wife was prepared to deal with a splitting up, the guy must divorce proceedings their own and you may shell out their own the fresh new ketubbah” (Also ha-Ezer #297). He says that a female who’s struck because of the their own spouse are entitled to a direct split up and also to have the currency due their unique in her relationship payment. Their guidance to slice off the hands out-of a habitual beater off their fellow echoes legislation from inside the Deut. –12, where in fact the uncommon abuse regarding cutting off a hands try used to help you a woman who attempts to cut her spouse inside a beneficial manner in which shames this new beater.
So you’re able to validate their thoughts, R. Meir uses biblical and you can talmudic point so you can legitimize their viewpoints. After which responsum he covers the newest legal precedents for this choice regarding Talmud (B. Gittin 88b). For this reason he ends up one to “even yet in the scenario where she are ready to accept [occasional beatings], she do not undertake beatings rather than an end around the corner.” He factors to the point that a finger has the possible to eliminate hence in the event that serenity is actually hopeless, the fresh rabbis need so you’re able to convince him so you’re able to divorce proceedings their unique of “his own totally free often,” in case one to demonstrates impossible, force him to help you separation and divorce their particular (as is welcome 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 Malaysisk kvinner som Гёnsker ГҐ gifte seg 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, these were overturned because of the most rabbis inside the afterwards 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).
