Meir’s responsa along with his content away from an effective responsum from the Roentgen

Rabbi Meir b. Baruch from Rothenburg (Maharam, c.1215–1293) produces you to “A great Jew need to award his spouse more the guy celebrates themselves. If an individual impacts an individual’s wife, you should feel penalized alot more severely compared to striking someone. For starters is actually enjoined to help you honor a person’s partner but is perhaps not enjoined to award the other person. . When the he continues when you look at the striking their particular, he might be excommunicated, lashed, and you can experience the brand new severest punishments, also to the the total amount away from amputating his arm. If their partner try ready to deal with a divorce case, he need divorce proceedings their own and you will shell out her the newest ketubbah” (Also ha-Ezer #297). He states you to definitely a female that is struck by the their own husband is actually entitled to an immediate breakup and also to get the currency owed their unique inside her relationship settlement. Their guidance to cut off the give out-of a habitual beater regarding their other echoes the law in the Deut. –several, in which the strange abuse regarding cutting-off a hands are applied to a woman exactly who tries to conserve her husband inside the an excellent method in which shames the newest beater.

So you’re able to validate his view, R. Meir spends biblical and you can talmudic matter in order to legitimize their views. After it responsum he discusses the new legal precedents because of it decision regarding the Talmud (B. Gittin 88b). Hence the guy ends you to definitely “even in the truth in which she try willing to take on [periodic beatings], she usually do not undertake beatings in the place of an end in sight.” He items to the truth that a digit has got the possible so you’re able to eliminate hence if comfort was impossible, new rabbis should try to help you encourage your so you can divorce her off “his own 100 % free commonly,” however if that demonstrates hopeless, force your to separation and divorce their own (as well as allowed for legal reasons [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 by very rabbis during the later on generations, beginning with Roentgen

R. Simhah lists klikkaa tГ¤tГ¤ täällГ¤ nyt 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).