An eye for an eye
From Free net encyclopedia
- This article is about the proverb. For the film, see Eye for an Eye (film).
The phrase "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth" expresses a principle of retributive justice also known as lex talionis (Latin, "law of retaliation"). The basis of this principle is proportionate punishment, sometimes expressed by the idiom "let the punishment fit the crime".
The principle is found in Babylonian Law, see Code of Hammurabi. It is surmised that in societies not bound by the rule of law, if a person was hurt, then the injured person (or their relative) would take vengeful retribution on the person who caused the injury. The retribution might be much worse than the crime, perhaps even death. Babylonian law put a limit on such actions, restricting the retribution to be no worse than the crime, as long as victim and offender occupied the same status in society. Punishments were less proportional with disputes between social strata.
The Torah (Exodus 21:22-27) offers its own statement of "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth". The Talmud (in Bava Kamma, 84a), based upon a critical interpretation of the original Hebrew text, explains that this biblical concept entails monetary compensation in tort cases. Personal retribution is explicitly forbidden by the Torah (Leviticus 19:18), such retributive justice being strictly reserved for the social magistrate (usually in the form of regional judges).
Christian interpretation of the biblical passage has been heavily influenced by the quotation of this verse in Jesus's Sermon on the Mount, on which see below.
Contents |
Lex talionis in Judaism
The oral law of Judaism holds that this verse cannot be interpreted as mandating exact physical retribution. The rabbis of the Talmud ask, "How can any person be certain that the punishment they inflict is definitely no worse than the initial injury?" They answer that this is one indication that the Bible, when stating "an eye for an eye," does not refer to physical retribution. They proceed to cite several more indicators for this thesis.
- The Oral Law explains, based upon the biblical verses, that the Bible mandates a sophisticated five-part monetary form of compensation, consisting of payment for "Damages, Pain, Medical Expenses, Incapacitation, and Mental Anguish" - which underlie many modern legal codes. Some rabbinic literature explains, moreover, that the expression, "An eye for an eye, etc." suggests that the perpetrator deserves to lose his own eye, but that biblical law treats him leniently. - (Paraphrased from Union of Orthodox Congregations website [1])
It should be noted that Judaism, while not allowing physical retribution for torts, does contain provisions for corporeal and capital punishment to be carried out for certain crimes by a designated civil entity.
Lex talionis in Christianity
In the Expounding of the Law (part of the Sermon on the Mount), Jesus of Nazareth urges his followers to turn the other cheek when confronted by violence:
- You have heard that it was said, "An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth". But I say to you, do not resist an evildoer. If anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. (Matthew 5:38-39, NRSV)
The passage continues with the importance of showing forgiveness to enemies and those who harm you. This saying of Jesus is frequently interpreted as criticism of the Old Testament teaching, and often taken as implying that "an eye for an eye" encourages excessive vengeance rather than an attempting to limit it.
Most Christian scholars and commentators have agreed that such an interpretation is a misunderstanding of this section of Matthew. They have discerned a series of six antitheses, in each of which Jesus quotes with approval the provisions of the Jewish Law, but then calls on his followers to go further. They have understood that Jesus was criticizing the misuse of the Law, not the Law itself. In other words, criticizing the attempt to justify personal vengeance outside the proper civil channels, or disproportionate vengeance, and calling on his followers to not only refrain from such abuses, but to go to the opposite extreme by exercising forgivness — even when one has a just claim to vengeance.
Criticisms
Many modern moralists have felt that merely limiting vengeance is not enough as even limited retaliation continues a potentially endless cycle of violence; Mahatma Gandhi remarked that:
- "An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth and the whole world would soon be blind and toothless."
Trivia
- The Creedence Clearwater Revival song "Bad Moon Rising", after recounting the narrator's parade of horribles, says, "one eye is taken for an eye".
- A character from the Australian soap opera Neighbours, Harold Bishop, uses the expression "an eye for an eye" when confronting tyrant Paul Robinson.
See also
External references
- Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations explanation of the Torah and Lex Talonis
- Calvin's Commentary on Exodus 21:22-26
- Calvin's Commentary on Matthew 5:38
- Aquinas' collation of commentaries on Matthew 5:38-42
- Tolstoy's Legacy for Mankind: A Manifesto for Nonviolence, Part 1
- Tolstoy's Legacy for Mankind: A Manifesto for Nonviolence, Part 2de:Auge für Auge