Meir’s responsa as well as in his content out-of a good responsum because of the Roentgen

Rabbi Meir b. Baruch regarding Rothenburg (Maharam, c.1215–1293) produces one to “Good Jew have to prize his partner more than he remembers himself. If an individual affects one’s spouse, you ought to getting punished a lot more really compared to striking another individual. For 1 was enjoined so you’re able to honor a person’s wife but is maybe not enjoined to honor one another. . In the event the the guy lasts during the striking their own, the guy is excommunicated, lashed, and you will sustain the fresh new severest punishments, even towards the amount out of amputating his sleeve. In the event that their spouse is willing to accept a divorce or separation, he need to divorce case their and you may shell out their unique the new ketubbah” (Also ha-Ezer #297). According to him one a brightwomen.net hyppää tГ¤lle sivustolle female who’s hit from the their unique partner was entitled to a direct divorce proceedings in order to get the money due their own in her relationships settlement. Their advice to cut off of the hands away from a habitual beater regarding their fellow echoes what the law states from inside the Deut. –12, where strange punishment of cutting-off a hand is actually applied to a woman which tries to save their particular partner in the a way that shames the beater.

So you can validate their advice, Roentgen. Meir uses biblical and talmudic point to legitimize his feedback. At the conclusion of that it responsum he talks about the fresh new legal precedents for this decision regarding Talmud (B. Gittin 88b). Ergo the guy closes you to definitely “even yet in possible in which she try willing to undertake [unexpected beatings], she usually do not deal with beatings in place of a conclusion around the corner.” He factors to the reality that a fist has the potential so you can eliminate which when the tranquility was impossible, new rabbis need in order to persuade your so you’re able to divorce or separation her off “his personal free will,” in case one shows hopeless, push your to help you divorce case her (as is welcome 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.

But not, these were overturned by really rabbis inside the after generations, you start with Roentgen

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).