Meir’s responsa and also in their duplicate of a good responsum of the R
Rabbi Meir b. Baruch off Rothenburg (Maharam, c.1215–1293) writes one to “A beneficial Jew need prize their partner more he honors himself. If an individual impacts an individual’s spouse, one should end up being penalized much more seriously than for hitting another person. For one are enjoined to prize a person’s wife it is maybe not enjoined so you’re able to award each other. . If the he lasts within the hitting their own, he can be excommunicated, lashed, and suffer new severest punishments, even with the extent of amputating his sleeve. When the their spouse try happy to undertake a separation, he need to split up their unique and pay their unique the newest ketubbah” (Also ha-Ezer #297). He states one a woman who is hit from the their own partner try entitled to a primary breakup also to have the money owed her inside her matrimony settlement. His advice to chop off of the hand out of a chronic beater away from his other echoes legislation within the Deut. –twelve, where uncommon punishment of cutting off a hand was applied so you can a lady just who tries to help save their own spouse in an effective way that shames this new beater.
In order to justify their viewpoint, R. Meir spends biblical and talmudic procedure in order to legitimize his feedback. At the conclusion of which responsum the guy covers the new legal precedents for it choice regarding the Talmud (B. Gittin 88b). Thus he stops that “even in the actual situation where she are prepared to take on [unexpected beatings], she usually do not undertake beatings instead of a finish in sight.” The guy items to that a digit gets the potential so you can eliminate which if the comfort try impossible, the fresh new rabbis need to convince your so you can split up their particular off “his or her own totally free https://brightwomen.net/tr/paraguayli-kadinlar/ will,” but if you to definitely demonstrates impossible, force your to help you breakup their own (as is allowed 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.
Although not, they certainly were overturned because of the really rabbis from inside the afterwards generations, starting 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).
0 comentarios