עברית
Faith
The Rambam and the Beating of Women
Question
Hello, esteemed Rabbi "Any woman who refrains from performing the work she is obligated to do may be coerced to do so even with a whip..." How did the Rambam permit the beating of women? (And Rashi as well) How can we relate to the fact that such great scholars viewed women as tools for satisfying needs? If she does not want to perform work, they permitted beating her?? I cannot understand this cruelty.. I would appreciate an answer
Answer
Greetings,
It is essential to be very careful with the inflammatory writings found online against Judaism, as these statements are distorted and false.
Halacha prohibits any form of harm towards a woman, stating explicitly that a man must honor and cherish his wife more than his own body. A man who beats his wife is liable to lashes according to the Torah (and certainly would be grounds for divorce).
Moreover, great Torah scholars have been stringent on this matter, stating that one must beat, and even cut off the hand of a man who strikes his wife. The Maharam of Rottenburg wrote (Responsa of Maharam, Siman 81):
"For it seems to me that every member of the covenant must honor his wife more than his own body... I received that one should be more stringent with this than with striking a fellow man, for one is not obligated to honor his fellow, but with his wife, he is obligated to honor her, and this is the way of the nations, but heaven forbid to put a member of the covenant into such practice. One who does so should be ostracized and banned, and punished in all sorts of degradation, and even have his hand cut off, if he is accustomed to this."
In Siman 240, the Maharam explained that Israel differs from the nations of the world: "And it is not the way of our people to beat their wives as the custom of the nations of the world. Heaven forbid for any member of the covenant to act in this way."
Rabbi Peretz bar Eliezer wrote: "Concerning the Israelites who raise their hands to strike their wives... therefore we enacted a strict decree and proclaimed against every Israelite man to enter into cherem... for such behavior is not to be done among Israel."
This is of course also grounds for divorce. In the Responsa of the Geonim (Sha'arei Tzedek, Part 4, Gate 4, Siman 42), it is stated: "Be aware that if it is established by witnesses that he struck her once or twice, the court is obligated to warn him and say: 'Be aware, you are not permitted to strike her, and if you do so again in your folly, she will leave with her ketubah...'"
Those who have studied the relevant law in the Rambam's book understand that a woman is punished by the court and not by her husband (note the precise words: "coerce her to do so" and not, heaven forbid, "to coerce upon her and do"). Moreover, the man himself is also punished with lashes by the court if he does not fulfill his obligations towards his wife. Thus, there is complete equality in the legal obligations and the punishments mentioned are applicable to both genders.
However, the truth is that this law seems to have been practiced only in the time of the Rambam (about 800 years ago), and other Torah scholars expressed wonder about it. Even the Ra'avad wrote regarding the Rambam's words: "I have never heard of beating women, but rather of reducing their necessities and provisions" (meaning that the husband behaves with his wife measure for measure regarding her lack of participation in household duties).
Thus, in reality, the Rambam never permitted the beating of women, especially not by her husband, and even when there existed a legal option of lashes for failure to fulfill household obligations - the punishment was exactly the same for failure to fulfill household obligations by the man. And this was only in the Rambam's generation and was never a part of Jewish law for all generations.
In practice, the Rambam rules that any woman can free herself from her husband if she only desires to do so. Opponents of the faith would certainly not quote what the Rambam writes in other halachot (Laws of Marriage, Chapter 14, Halacha 10): "If she says, 'I despise him and cannot be with him willingly' - we compel him to divorce her immediately, as she is not captive (meaning, she is not in captivity to be with someone she despises)." Thus, a woman can divorce her husband at will and he is obligated to divorce her according to halacha, if he is someone she despises. It is self-evident that a woman would naturally despise a husband who beats her.
Not only did the Rambam not permit the beating of women, but on the contrary, he ruled that it is forbidden to instill fear upon the woman, and that one should honor her more than his own body and love her as his own body. So ruled the Rambam explicitly in a manner that leaves no room for doubt, in an era when the beating of women was a common and accepted practice in the non-Jewish world (Laws of Marriage, Chapter 15, Halachot 17-20): "It is a duty upon every man to provide for his wife. The Sages said that no man is jealous of his wife except when a spirit of purity has entered him, and he should not be overly jealous, nor coerce her against her will but according to her understanding and in joy. And likewise, the Sages commanded that a man honor his wife more than his own body and love her as his own body, and if he has money, he should increase her benefit according to his wealth, and he should not instill excessive fear upon her and his speech with her should be calm and he should not be angry or cross." Can the beating of women fulfill the principle of "and honor women more than his own body and love her as his own body"?
Judaism does not view a woman as "a tool" for meeting a man's needs, but rather the opposite, as the other half, that only together they are considered "a human" fulfilling the purpose of creation.
With blessings,
Daniel Bles
Daniel Bles
