Meir’s responsa plus his backup regarding a good responsum of the Roentgen

Rabbi Meir b. Baruch from Rothenburg (Maharam, c.1215–1293) writes you to “A Jew must prize their partner more the guy honors himself. If a person influences a person’s spouse, you will need to getting punished even more seriously compared to hitting someone else. For starters is actually enjoined in order to honor one’s partner but is maybe not enjoined so you’re able to prize one another. . In the event that he continues in the striking their unique, the guy are going to be excommunicated, lashed, and sustain the new severest punishments, even to your extent regarding amputating his sleeve. If their partner is actually willing to undertake a splitting up, he need certainly to split up their particular and you can spend their unique the newest ketubbah” (Even ha-Ezer #297). He says one a woman that is struck of the their own spouse is actually entitled to a direct divorce proceedings and to get RusГ§a bayanlar koca arД±yor the money owed their particular in her matrimony settlement. Their recommendations to slice off of the hands regarding a chronic beater regarding his fellow echoes what the law states into the Deut. –several, where the unusual punishment off cutting off a hands are applied so you can a lady which tries to rescue their unique spouse within the a beneficial manner in which shames the fresh new beater.

In order to validate his viewpoint, Roentgen. Meir spends biblical and you will talmudic point so you can legitimize their opinions. At the end of that it responsum he covers the new courtroom precedents because of it choice about Talmud (B. Gittin 88b). For this reason he closes one “even yet in the situation where she is happy to undertake [unexpected beatings], she never undertake beatings without an-end coming soon.” The guy points to the truth that a digit provides the possible in order to destroy and that in the event that tranquility is impossible, brand new rabbis need to help you convince him in order to separation and divorce her off “his very own 100 % free often,” in case you to shows impossible, push your to separation and divorce their unique (as is greet 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 were overturned because of the most rabbis from inside the afterwards 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 (1390–1460) 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).