Within his responsum, Radbaz wrote you to Sim
Rabbi Meir b. 1215–1293) writes that “A good Jew need certainly to award his partner over he remembers themselves. If an individual effects your partner, you will need to become penalized a whole lot more honestly compared to striking someone. For one are enjoined in order to honor your wife but is not enjoined to prize one another. . If the he continues in hitting their, he might be excommunicated, lashed, and you may suffer brand new severest punishments, even towards the the quantity from amputating his case. In the event that their spouse is actually prepared to accept a splitting up, he must divorce proceedings their and you will pay their the newest ketubbah” (Actually ha-Ezer #297). He states you to definitely a woman that is struck by their own spouse is actually permitted a direct split up also to have the currency owed her in her own matrimony payment ukrainian charm app. His pointers to chop from the hands of a habitual beater off his fellow echoes what the law states in the Deut. –twelve, where in actuality the unusual discipline out-of cutting off a give is actually applied so you’re able to a lady exactly who tries to cut their own partner in the a beneficial method in which shames brand new beater.
So you’re able to validate his advice, R. Meir uses biblical and you will talmudic thing to legitimize their views. After it responsum he discusses new courtroom precedents for this decision regarding the Talmud (B. Gittin 88b). Thus he closes you to definitely “even yet in possible where she are happy to accept [periodic beatings], she don’t undertake beatings instead an end coming soon.” The guy what to that a digit comes with the possible so you’re able to destroy and this if serenity is actually hopeless, the rabbis should try to help you encourage him to separation their own out-of “his personal totally free usually,” however if you to definitely shows hopeless, force your so you’re able to splitting up their own (as is anticipate for legal reasons [ka-torah]).
This responsum is found in a collection of R. Meir’s responsa and in his copy of a responsum by 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.
Baruch out of Rothenburg (Maharam, c
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. However, they were overturned by most rabbis in later generations, starting with R. Israel b. Petahiah Isserlein (1390–1460) and R. David b. Solomon Ibn Abi Zimra (Radbaz, 1479–1573). hah “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).
No Comments