Meir’s responsa and in their backup regarding an effective responsum of the R
Rabbi Meir b. Baruch from Rothenburg (Maharam, c.1215–1293) writes you to definitely “Good Jew have to honor his spouse more the guy celebrates themselves. If an individual affects one’s spouse, you will need to end up being penalized a lot more really than for hitting someone else. For one is enjoined to help you award your wife it is perhaps not enjoined to help you award the other person. . If he persists inside striking their particular, he are going to be excommunicated, lashed, and you can endure the fresh severest punishments, also into extent regarding amputating his arm. If the their partner is happy to accept a divorce or separation, the guy need to divorce their unique and you can pay their unique brand new ketubbah” (Actually ha-Ezer #297). He says one to a lady who’s struck by the their husband are eligible to a direct separation and also to have the currency owed their particular in her matrimony payment. Their recommendations to slice from the hand of a habitual beater from their fellow echoes the law during the Deut. –12, in which the strange abuse out-of cutting-off a hands was used so you can a female which tries to cut her spouse in the an excellent manner in which shames brand new beater.
To help you justify their advice, Roentgen. Meir spends biblical and you will talmudic question in order to legitimize their viewpoints. At the end of that it responsum the guy discusses the new courtroom precedents for this choice on Talmud (B. Gittin 88b). For this reason he finishes one “in the case in which she is actually happy to deal with [occasional beatings], she do not accept beatings rather than an-end in sight.” He points to the reality that a hand has got the potential to eliminate and this in the event the tranquility are hopeless, the latest rabbis should try to help you encourage him to separation and divorce her out of “their own totally free usually,” but if one shows impossible, push your so you’re able to splitting up their particular (as it is desired 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 from the very rabbis for the later years, starting 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).