Meir’s responsa plus in their duplicate away from a good responsum by Roentgen
Rabbi Meir b. Baruch off Rothenburg (Maharam, c.1215–1293) writes you to definitely “An excellent Jew need honor his spouse more than he remembers themselves. If one affects your spouse, one should end up being penalized much more seriously than for striking someone. For 1 are enjoined so you can award an individual’s spouse it is not enjoined so you can prize each other. . When the he persists in striking her, he shall be excommunicated, lashed, and you can sustain the new severest punishments, actually for the the quantity off amputating his sleeve. If the their partner is prepared to deal with a breakup, the guy need certainly to divorce case their particular and you will pay their particular this new ketubbah” (Actually ha-Ezer #297). According to him that a female who is struck because of the their own partner is entitled to a primary splitting up and to have the money owed their inside her relationships settlement. His guidance to slice from the hands off a chronic beater regarding his fellow echoes legislation inside Deut. –12, where in fact the strange abuse out of cutting off a hands was applied to help you a woman who tries to help save her partner from inside the a beneficial way that shames this new beater.
To justify his viewpoint, R. Meir spends biblical and you will talmudic matter to help you legitimize their viewpoints. At the conclusion of which responsum he discusses the newest judge precedents for this decision throughout the Talmud (B. Gittin 88b). Therefore he finishes one “even in the scenario where she is happy to deal with [unexpected beatings], she don’t deal with beatings instead of an end in sight.” The guy factors to the fact a fist provides the possible to destroy hence if the serenity was impossible, the latest rabbis should try to persuade him to separation and divorce their unique off “their own free commonly,” in case you to shows impossible, force him to help you separation and divorce their particular (as it is greet 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.
Although not, they certainly were overturned of the extremely rabbis into the after generations, 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 Pakistan kadД±nlarД± AmerikalД± erkeklerden hoЕџlanД±yor mu? 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).
