Certain Ashkenazi rabbis thought battering while the grounds for forcing a guy supply a good Writ off (religious) divorce proceedings score

Meir’s responsa along with their backup out-of a good responsum by R

Rabbi Meir b. Baruch regarding Rothenburg (Maharam, c.1215–۱۲۹۳) writes you to “Good Jew have to honor their spouse over the guy celebrates themselves. If an individual influences your partner, you need to getting penalized far more seriously than for striking someone else. For example is enjoined to award a person’s spouse but is not enjoined so you can prize one another. . In the event the he continues during the hitting her, the guy is going to be excommunicated, lashed, and you will experience the severest punishments, also into the amount away from amputating their arm. When the their spouse are happy to accept a divorce, the guy must divorce case her and you can pay their new ketubbah” (Actually ha-Ezer #297). He says you to a lady who’s hit by the their own husband was eligible to a primary divorce case and also to get the money owed their particular within her relationship payment. His information to chop off of the hand of a habitual beater out-of his fellow echoes the law into the Deut. –a dozen, where strange punishment of cutting off a hand try applied so you’re able to a lady just who attempts to rescue their own partner into the an excellent method in which shames the fresh beater.

To justify his advice, Roentgen. Meir spends biblical and you will talmudic material so you can legitimize his opinions. At the conclusion of it responsum he discusses brand new court precedents because of it choice in the Talmud (B. Gittin 88b). For this reason he finishes you to “even yet in the actual situation where she was happy to take on [occasional beatings], she try not to accept beatings versus a conclusion in sight.” He factors to the truth that a thumb comes with the possible to eliminate hence if the serenity are impossible, the latest rabbis need so you’re able to persuade him to help you splitting up her from “his personal 100 % free tend to,” in case one proves hopeless, force him in order to divorce proceedings their own (as well as invited for legal reasons [ka-torah]).

This responsum is found in a collection of R. Simhah b. Samuel of Speyer (d. 1225–۱۲۳۰). 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.

Yet not, these were overturned because of the most rabbis in later years, beginning with R

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 (1390–۱۴۶۰) and R. David b. Solomon Ibn Abi Zimra (Radbaz, 1479–۱۵۷۳). In his responsum, Radbaz wrote that Simhah “exaggerated on the measures brightwomen.net Nyttig kilde 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).