Meir’s responsa as well as in his copy from an effective responsum because of the Roentgen
Rabbi Meir b. Baruch off Rothenburg (Maharam, c.1215–1293) writes one to “A good Jew need to prize their wife over the guy remembers himself. If one affects your wife, you will need to getting penalized more severely compared to hitting someone else. For one try enjoined so you’re able to award a person’s partner it is maybe not enjoined so you can award the other person. . If the he lasts inside hitting their own, the guy should be excommunicated, lashed, and sustain the fresh severest punishments, also towards the the total amount bride Sofia away from amputating their arm. In the event that his partner is happy to take on a splitting up, the guy need separation their particular and pay her the newest ketubbah” (Even ha-Ezer #297). He says one to a lady that is strike by her spouse are entitled to a primary separation and have the currency owed her in her own relationship payment. Their pointers to cut off the hand of a chronic beater regarding their fellow echoes regulations when you look at the Deut. –a dozen, where in actuality the uncommon punishment off cutting-off a hand is actually used in order to a female which tries to conserve their particular partner during the a beneficial way that shames new beater.
So you can justify his view, R. Meir uses biblical and you may talmudic procedure so you can legitimize their feedback. After which responsum the guy discusses brand new court precedents for it choice throughout the Talmud (B. Gittin 88b). Therefore he finishes you to “inside the fact in which she is ready to deal with [occasional beatings], she try not to take on beatings in the place of an-end coming soon.” He points to the reality that a fist gets the potential so you can eliminate and therefore in the event that comfort is impossible, the newest rabbis need to convince him to help you divorce or separation their unique from “his very own free have a tendency to,” in case one proves impossible, force your so you’re able to split up their unique (as it is allowed 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.
not, these were overturned because of the very rabbis in later on years, beginning 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).