Meir’s responsa plus his content from a good responsum from the R
Rabbi Meir b. Baruch away from Rothenburg (Maharam, c.1215–1293) writes one “A good Jew need to honor their wife more the guy remembers himself. If a person influences one’s spouse, you will need to feel punished significantly more really than for striking another person. For 1 try enjoined so you can honor a person’s spouse it is maybe not enjoined so you’re able to honor each other. . In the event the he persists during the hitting their, the guy are going to be excommunicated, lashed, and you can experience this new severest punishments, actually to the the amount away from amputating their sleeve. If the their spouse is actually ready to accept a separation and divorce, the guy need divorce case their and shell out her the fresh ketubbah” (Actually ha-Ezer #297). He says that a female who’s strike by their unique partner are permitted a direct split up and to have the money owed their own inside her relationship settlement. Their guidance to cut off of the hands off a chronic beater from their other echoes the law within the Deut. –12, where the uncommon punishment off cutting off a give try used to a female which attempts to save her partner within the an effective way that shames the newest beater.
So you can justify their thoughts, Roentgen. Meir uses biblical and you may talmudic procedure so you’re able to legitimize their views. At the conclusion of so it responsum he covers brand new court precedents for it choice from the Talmud (B. Gittin 88b). Hence he comes to an end one to “despite possible where she try happy to deal with [occasional beatings], she try not to undertake beatings in the place of an end in sight.” He things to the point that a little finger contains the prospective to help you kill and that if peace try hopeless, new rabbis need so you’re able to convince your to separation their own from “his own free commonly,” but if you to shows hopeless, force your to help you splitting up their own (as it is enjoy 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.
not, they certainly were overturned because of the extremely rabbis inside later on generations, beginning 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 Burmesisk kvinner i oss. 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).