Mishpatim
(Compensation of) An
eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, a
hand for a hand, a foot for a foot, a burn for a burn, a wound for a wound, a
bruise for a bruise.
This law was never intended to be understood word for
word…we determine the loss in terms of monetary value
Rashi (13th Century)
The Talmud points out the moral absurdity of
interpreting this law literally; i.e., that one who puts out the eye of another
must have his own eye put out, etc. What
if, for instance, a one eyed man put out one eye of a man who had two healthy
eyes, is punished
by having his own one eye put out and then dies as a result? In that case his punishment would not be
just, since he would then lose his life for an offense
which caused his victim only the loss of one of two bodily organs (with the
other one still intact).
Samson Raphael Hirsch (19th Century)
When our sages decided that the meaning of “an eye for
an eye” is that this legislation has to be expressed in terms of financial
compensation, they did so in order that the principle of “as he has done to him,
so shall be done to him” can also be carried out at the same time.…A Kohen who,
as a result of losing one eye would no longer be able to perform service in the
temple, is certainly more affected by the loss of such an eye than his
counterpart who is a member of any other tribe.
Minor variations, such as the difference in the quality of one’s
eyesight, social standing of either the injured or the offending party are
numerous, and all suggest that only by applying monetary compensation can the
objective “as he has done so shall be done to him,” be achieved in reasonable
measure. (Leviticus 24:19)
Akedat
Yitzchak (15th Century)
Every significant Jewish movement throughout history
has an eschatology, a vision of what things will be
like at the end and of how to get there.
Eschatology, by its very nature, is an imprecise science…Despite this
subjective quality, most Jewish thinkers have agreed on the broad outlines of
the scenario. It envisions an age of
universal peace and social justice…even those who don’t believe that this
scenario is a literally true description of future events
accept it as a powerful affirmation of Judaism’s ultimate value system…Halakha (Jewish law) provides one model. This model is not centered about a single
intrinsically sacred spot, but rather in a behavioral pattern. It takes the manifold activities human beings
perform in the course of their daily lives, and structures them so that some
are permitted and others forbidden. It
structures human behavior. And it is
transportable. Jews carried it on their
backs, long after the
Neil Gillman (Contemporary)
David Ben Gurion once said
that he knew we had a real Jewish state when the first jewish thief and the first Jewish prostitute were
arrested by a jewish policeman in Tel Aviv. Immediately after Sinai, we are back in the
real world where we must deal with the problems of poverty and slavery, theft
and carelessness, and the harm that results from them. We can’t live at Sinai forever; we have to
take the mystical and transcendent and make it work in an imperfect world. We are given the task of translating the
spiritual into the physical…the point is that the system we all subscribe to
reminds us that working for a just and caring world, where everyone is treated
with respect, is not a programming option, but the whole purpose of the
program.
Susan Gulack (Contemporary)
The Torah was meant to form a uniquely Jewish
conscience and consciousness; its purpose was never to be the final arbiter in
judicial decisions. These were the realm
of the Oral Law…Year after year, the Torah reader declares that someone who
takes out an eye must pay with his own eye, even though we do not – and never
did – require wholesale amputation as punishment. “An eye for an eye” may be cold law but it is
the truth of life and
no other punishment could make a person understand the gravity of
what he’s done. What the Torah wants
from us is to understand the implications of our actions to their very
depths…The Written Law which trains our conscience must tell us…of the enormity
of our crime…The Oral Law directs our society.
One cannot work without the other.
One without the other cannot guide.
Shlomo Riskin (Contemporary)