In his responsum, Radbaz penned one to Sim
Rabbi Meir b. 1215–1293) produces one “A Jew need award their spouse more he honors themselves. If an individual impacts an individual’s spouse, one should become penalized a lot more seriously compared to hitting someone. For just one is actually enjoined in order to award a person’s wife it is perhaps not enjoined in order to honor each other. . In the event that the guy continues from inside the hitting their, he would be excommunicated, lashed, and sustain this new severest punishments, actually to the the quantity away from amputating his arm. In the event the their partner are happy to undertake a divorce, the guy need breakup their particular and you can spend their own the new ketubbah” (Even ha-Ezer #297). According to him that a female that is struck because of the their partner was eligible to an immediate divorce case and have the money owed their particular in her own marriage payment. His pointers to cut off the hands away from a chronic beater regarding their other echoes what the law states within the Deut. –twelve, the spot where the unusual abuse regarding cutting-off a give is used in order to a lady which attempts to rescue their unique partner during the a great manner in which shames brand new beater.
To help you justify their thoughts, Roentgen. Meir spends biblical and you will talmudic issue in order to legitimize his views. At the end of this responsum he talks about the brand new judge precedents for this decision regarding Talmud (B. Gittin 88b). For this reason he finishes one “in the fact where she was ready to accept [periodic beatings], she dont accept beatings instead an-end around the corner.” The guy items to the point that a hand gets the potential to kill which in the event the comfort is actually hopeless, this new rabbis should try so you’re able to encourage him to breakup their unique regarding “his or her own totally free will,” in case that proves impossible, push your to divorce case her (as is invited by-law [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 visit this site right here 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 regarding 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).