Author Topic: An eye for an eye - Ramban's understanding  (Read 2158 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline edu

  • Master JTFer
  • ******
  • Posts: 1866
An eye for an eye - Ramban's understanding
« on: September 09, 2012, 02:42:48 AM »
An eye for an eye - It is our accepted Rabbinic tradition that it is a monetary payment (Mechilta, and Baba Kama 84a) and we find this type of terminology used by payments in the verse (Vayikra/Leviticus 24:18) "And he that hits a beast shall pay for it, a life for a life.

Without vowing, I will try to add more of Ramban has to say about this subject at a later time.

Offline muman613

  • Platinum JTF Member
  • **********
  • Posts: 29958
  • All souls praise Hashem, Hallelukah!
    • muman613 Torah Wisdom
Re: An eye for an eye - Ramban's understanding
« Reply #1 on: September 09, 2012, 03:59:53 PM »
This idea also relates to the concept of Middah K'Neged Middah, or 'Measure for Measure'. This concept is used in relation to reward and punishment. And being that we are in the week before the High Holidays it is essential to realize that Middah K'Neged Middah is the core of the judgement Hashem makes concerning our next year.

If one does something which causes damage to someone you must repay him for the value of the property which was damaged. When we act in a way which violates Hashems laws we will receive a potch/smack which hopefully will cause us to realize the error of our ways, and if we ignore it we may just lose our lease on life and not be written in the book of life next year.

Here is short excerpt of an explanation of Middah Keneged Middah:



http://www.shemayisrael.com/parsha/peninim/archives/shemos64.htm

.
.
.

The Brisker Rav replied, "Whether screaming helps or not is not the issue. When it hurts, one screams. To hear about the tragedy hurts!" He continued by elucidating the Midrash that says that three advisors sat with Pharaoh to guide him concerning the decision about the "Jewish Problem": Iyov, Yisro and Bilaam. They each reacted differently and were punished accordingly. Bilaam, who advised Pharaoh to kill the Jewish boys, was himself killed. Yisro escaped. Because he fled, his descendants sat in halachic arbitration in the Lishkas Hagazis, Chamber of Hewn Stones. Iyov, who was silent, was punished by having to endure severe pain.

A person is repaid in the exact manner, measure for measure, as his actions. Hashem will repay accordingly the individual who gives charity to a poor man with a smile and shares his wherewithal unbegrudgingly with others. Bilaam and Yisro received their due middah k'neged middah, measure for measure. Bilaam advised to murder the Jewish boys, so he himself was later killed. Yisro was wealthy and famous. He was revered and exalted by all of Egypt. He turned his back on fame and fortune and ran away. For this, he was granted the great distinction of having descendants that arbitrated and adjudicated Jewish law. What, however, was the middah k'neged middah of Iyov's punishment? What relationship is there between pain and silence?

The Brisker Rav explained that Iyov had many reasons for keeping silent. He was acutely aware that he could not change the decree; therefore, screaming would be to no avail. Iyov felt that if he would not succeed in averting the decree, he might as well remain silent and be politically correct. Perhaps, he would be able to help the Jews later on.

Therefore, Hashem punished him with severe pain, so that Iyov would cry out in agony. Does crying out allay the pain? Does the pain diminish when one cries? No, but when it hurts, one cries. Any person who is in anguish cries out, because it is the normal reaction to pain. Likewise, when Iyov heard the terrible decree, it should have hurt to the point that he could not remain silent. Why did he not cry out? Apparently, the decree did not cause him sufficient anguish to invoke a scream. Therefore, Hashem gave him cause to scream.
.
.
.
You shall make yourself the Festival of Sukkoth for seven days, when you gather in [the produce] from your threshing floor and your vat.And you shall rejoice in your Festival-you, and your son, and your daughter, and your manservant, and your maidservant, and the Levite, and the stranger, and the orphan, and the widow, who are within your cities
Duet 16:13-14

Offline muman613

  • Platinum JTF Member
  • **********
  • Posts: 29958
  • All souls praise Hashem, Hallelukah!
    • muman613 Torah Wisdom
Re: An eye for an eye - Ramban's understanding
« Reply #2 on: September 09, 2012, 04:06:13 PM »
Here Rabbi Buchwald basically explains what I was trying to say:



http://rabbibuchwald.njop.org/2008/12/22/mikeitz-5769-2008/

.
.
.

The Talmud in Bava Kama 83b, records a discussion among the rabbis questioning the rabbinic insistence on monetary compensation. “Does not the Divine law say an ‘eye for an eye’?” ask the rabbis. Does this not mean to literally take out the eye of the offender? The rabbis however reject this reasoning, insisting that the idea of retributive justice not enter anyone’s mind. Furthermore, even if one might conclude that the offender’s eye be put out, arm cut off, or leg broken, this can not be correct because of the biblical verse in Leviticus 24 that states, “He who smiteth any man…and he who smiteth a beast.” Say the rabbis: Just as in the case of wounding a beast, monetary compensation is to be paid, so in the case of wounding a man, only monetary compensation is to be paid. Furthermore, the Bible states (Numbers 35:31), that one may not take ransom in exchange for the life of a murderer who is deserving of death. However, it is only for the life of a murderer that one may not take ransom. But, a ransom may be taken for damage to limbs, even though they can not be restored.

With these statements, Judaism revolutionized ancient legal practices, insisting that physical damages be compensated by monetary payment rather than through retaliation.

On the other hand, Judaism clearly assumes that heavenly justice is dispensed by the “measure for measure” principle. Rabbi Judah is recorded in Sotah 8b, to have said (Rabbi Meir is similarly cited in Sanhedrin 100a): How do we know that a person is evaluated in heaven in the same manner that he evaluates other people in this world? As it is said (Isaiah 27:8): “By measure in sending her away thou does contend with her.”

Frequent examples are found in the Torah affirming that heavenly punishment is meted out Middah k’neged middah, measure for measure.

The Talmud in Erachin 16b, points out that a person stricken with Tzaraat for speaking evil of others is sent out of the camp. After all, since this person separated a man from his wife, or a man from his friend by speaking evil against them, the Torah decrees (Leviticus 13:46): “Let him dwell alone.”

The Talmud in Sotah 11a, notes that the Egyptians, who cast Jewish children into the waters, were themselves punished by water. As the Bible says in Exodus 18:11 “Asher zadu,” as the Egyptians schemed, meaning literally that they were cooked in their own pot. The rabbis in Megillah 12b, suggest that Vashti was ordered by Ahasuerus to appear naked at his party to show her beauty to all, as punishment for forcing the Jewish girls to come naked and work for her on Shabbat. As it says in Esther 2:1, that which she has done, and that which was decreed against her.

Fortunately, the Al-mighty’s practice of compensating measure for measure applies not only for evil, but also for good. Therefore, in Numbers 12, when Miriam is stricken with Tzaraat for speaking against Moses, the people wait seven days for her to heal, to reward her for watching over baby Moses when he was placed in the bulrushes at the river (Exodus 2:4).

Similarly, since Joseph went to extraordinary lengths to make certain that his father was buried properly in the land of Israel, he merited that Moses would personally carry Joseph’s bones out of Egypt, to ensure that he too would ultimately be buried in the land of Canaan. Because of the kindness he rendered to Joseph, Moses was compensated as well, meriting to be buried by the Al-mighty Himself (Talmud, Sotah 9b).
.
.
.
You shall make yourself the Festival of Sukkoth for seven days, when you gather in [the produce] from your threshing floor and your vat.And you shall rejoice in your Festival-you, and your son, and your daughter, and your manservant, and your maidservant, and the Levite, and the stranger, and the orphan, and the widow, who are within your cities
Duet 16:13-14

Offline edu

  • Master JTFer
  • ******
  • Posts: 1866
Re: An eye for an eye - Ramban's understanding
« Reply #3 on: September 11, 2012, 02:01:48 AM »
I agree with Muman613 that the idea of measure for measure is a concept that surfaces in many different areas of the Torah.

Offline edu

  • Master JTFer
  • ******
  • Posts: 1866
Re: An eye for an eye - Ramban's understanding
« Reply #4 on: September 11, 2012, 02:42:15 AM »
Getting back to Ramban's commentary on the Biblical Phrase: An eye for an eye
Ramban quotes Ibn Ezra, to explain why the Torah would use the phrase "An eye for an eye" if the real punishment by the court is monetary.
He says, that the intent of Scripture is to say that the person is liable to this punishment if he does not pay his ransom (atonement money). And Scripture forbids us to take ransom (atonement money) for the life of a murderer, who is found wicked enough to be liable for the death penalty (see Bamidbar/Numbers 35:31); but we will take ransom (atonement money) from someone who is wicked to the point where he is only liable to have one of his limbs cut off.
Therefore we will never cut it off, but rather he will pay the monetary value. And if he does not have the money, it will be upon him as a debt, until he is able to get it someway, and he is redeemed.

Offline Kahane-Was-Right BT

  • Honorable Winged Member
  • Gold Star JTF Member
  • *
  • Posts: 12581
Re: An eye for an eye - Ramban's understanding
« Reply #5 on: September 23, 2012, 08:10:30 PM »
Interesting post, edu.  One of the historical chiddushim of Judaism.