Meir’s responsa along with their duplicate out of a good responsum by R
Rabbi Meir b. Baruch of Rothenburg (Maharam, c.1215–1293) produces one to “A beneficial Jew need prize his partner more he celebrates himself. If one strikes your wife, you will need to become penalized far more really than for striking someone else enkle Vietnamesisk kvinner. For example was enjoined to help you prize your wife but is not enjoined to prize the other person. . In the event that he continues when you look at the hitting their, the guy is excommunicated, lashed, and you will sustain the latest severest punishments, actually towards the amount out of amputating his arm. If the their wife try happy to deal with a separation and divorce, the guy need certainly to separation their and you can pay their the new ketubbah” (Actually ha-Ezer #297). According to him one to a female that is strike of the their unique partner is actually entitled to a primary divorce also to have the currency owed her inside her relationships payment. Their suggestions to slice from the hand away from a habitual beater away from their other echoes what the law states in Deut. –twelve, where in fact the strange discipline away from cutting off a give is actually used so you’re able to a woman just who tries to conserve their particular partner inside good method in which shames the fresh new beater.
So you can justify their viewpoint, R. Meir spends biblical and you may talmudic thing so you’re able to legitimize their views. After this responsum he discusses the latest courtroom precedents because of it decision regarding the Talmud (B. Gittin 88b). Thus the guy closes that “even in the fact where she was willing to take on [unexpected beatings], she cannot take on beatings in the place of a conclusion in sight.” The guy things to the truth that a finger contains the possible to eliminate and this if serenity was impossible, this new rabbis need in order to persuade him so you’re able to divorce proceedings their out of “their own free will,” however if you to shows impossible, force him so you’re able to divorce case their (as it is invited 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.
not, they certainly were overturned of the really rabbis inside later on years, you start 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. 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).