Meir’s responsa as well as in their content off a beneficial responsum by R

Rabbi Meir b. Baruch from Rothenburg (Maharam, c.1215–1293) produces that “A great Jew must honor their wife over the guy honors himself. If a person impacts an individual’s wife, one should become punished way more seriously than for striking someone. For starters try enjoined in order to honor one’s partner it is maybe not enjoined to honor one another. . If the guy continues in striking their unique, the guy will likely be excommunicated, lashed, and endure the severest punishments, also on the the quantity out of amputating their sleeve. If his spouse is ready to accept a divorce or separation, the guy need certainly to divorce case her and you may shell out their the ketubbah” (Also ha-Ezer #297). He says you to a woman Intia-naiset etsivГ¤t Yhdysvaltain miehiГ¤ who’s struck from the her spouse was permitted a direct separation in order to get the money due her within her marriage settlement. His advice to chop off the give off a chronic beater from their other echoes legislation within the Deut. –several, where in actuality the unusual punishment out-of cutting off a hand is actually applied in order to a woman just who tries to cut their spouse within the good manner in which shames the brand new beater.

So you’re able to validate his opinion, Roentgen. Meir spends biblical and you may talmudic topic to help you legitimize his viewpoints. After this responsum the guy covers the new judge precedents for this decision regarding Talmud (B. Gittin 88b). Thus the guy stops one “even yet in the actual situation in which she is prepared to accept [occasional beatings], she usually do not accept beatings versus an end in sight.” He factors to the truth that a fist contains the potential in order to kill which if tranquility try impossible, brand new rabbis need in order to persuade him in order to splitting up their unique off “his own 100 % free usually,” in case one to proves hopeless, force your so you can separation their own (as it is allowed by law [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, they certainly were overturned because of the really rabbis into the afterwards generations, 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).