Eye For An Eye
A principle of proportional justice contrasted with non-retaliation.
AI-generated artistic depiction (no historical imagery exists)
The phrase 'eye for an eye' appears in the Hebrew Bible as a principle of proportional justice. Exodus 21:24 states, 'Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot,' and Leviticus 24:20 similarly declares, 'Breach for breach, eye for eye, tooth for tooth: as he hath caused a blemish in a man, so shall it be done to him again.' In the New Testament, Matthew 5:39 presents a contrasting teaching: 'But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.'
Lore & Background
In Exodus 21:24, the 'eye for an eye' formula appears within a legal code addressing injuries, establishing that punishment should match the harm inflicted. Leviticus 24:20 reinforces this by specifying that a blemish caused to another must be repaid in kind, emphasizing equivalence in retribution. These passages present the concept as a judicial standard for community order, limiting vengeance to the degree of the offense. Matthew 5:39 directly challenges this legal tradition, instructing followers not to resist evil and to offer the other cheek when struck. This teaching does not abolish the earlier law but presents a personal ethic of non-retaliation, shifting focus from public justice to individual response. The juxtaposition highlights a tension between communal legal norms and a radical call to forgo personal revenge. Across these passages, 'eye for an eye' functions as both a legal maxim and a point of departure for a new ethical teaching. The Old Testament passages ground it in concrete legal contexts, while the New Testament passage reinterprets it as a foil for a principle of non-resistance. The motif thus evolves from a rule of proportionate justice to a symbol of a transformed moral approach.
Reader's Guide
The passages portray 'eye for an eye' as a legal principle of exact retribution in Exodus 21:24 and Leviticus 24:20, where it governs cases of physical harm. In Exodus, the formula appears in a list of penalties for personal injuries, ensuring that the punishment does not exceed the crime. Leviticus applies the same logic to blemishes, requiring that the offender suffer the same injury they caused. These texts present the principle as a public, judicial standard, not a license for personal vendetta. Matthew 5:39 presents a direct contrast, instructing followers to turn the other cheek rather than retaliate. This passage does not deny the existence of the earlier law but offers a different response for personal conduct. The portrayal shifts from a societal rule to an individual ethic, emphasizing non-resistance over proportional justice. The passages together show a development from a legal code of equivalence to a personal call for forbearance, without reconciling the two approaches within the texts themselves.
Did You Know?
- Exodus 21:24 lists 'eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot' as part of a legal code for injuries (Exodus 21:24).
- Leviticus 24:20 extends the principle to include 'breach for breach' and 'blemish' for blemish (Leviticus 24:20).
- Matthew 5:39 does not mention 'eye for an eye' but directly counters the principle by instructing non-resistance (Matthew 5:39).
- The passages do not specify whether the 'eye for an eye' rule was ever literally enforced or served as a guideline for monetary compensation.