Example Of Essay On The Mishnah And Talmud

The law gives a practical sense of reality and daily activity of issues. Holiness is, in the Mishnah, not mere ritual or taboo but a practical governor of conduct among the faithful. It is, for this reason, tremendously vital to interpreting the law fairly and with understanding to ensure the service of justice. The 'eye for an eye' principle, for instance, does not directly mean to retaliate and revenge according to the Mishnah and Talmud.

The eye for an eye rule

The 'eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, wound for lesion, strip for stripe and burning for burning' rule is found in the the 21st chapter of Moses book of Exodus. It purports that an offender should get an equal share of damage inflicted to obtain justice in striving to minimize malicious deeds among the people. Through fear of the implications and consequences of violence, the law ensured rare of cases of especially domestic violence. The Mishnah eludes the direct application of the 'eye for an eye' rule that seems as a retaliation or act of revenge and opts for compensation instead. The Mishnah observes the rule as the effort of the Torah to obtain neutrality as much as possible. Compensating the injured person is Mishnah's point of focus rather than a literal punishment of equal magnitude to the crime. The Talmud view on the Torah's direction to pay damages by the same measure of damage is expounded. Considering the Torah's direction on the implication of a murderer (in Numbers. 35: 31), the Talmud notes that only one guilty of death is not spared the consequence of death. This part means that the rest of the criminals can be spared the agony of equal measure of damage. This verse is a proof people guilty of murder are the only ones who cannot get an alternative punishment. In replacing the retaliation, the Talmud offers consideration and options for more types of punishment.
Retaliation by equal measure of the criminal deed committed does not serve justice satisfactorily and in neutrality. First is the reason, the eyes may not be similar (one could be bigger than the other or another one more faulty). In another case, a guilty offender may already be lame (with either only a single foot or arm) or entirely cripple. In addition, a sickly person with terminal illness may kill a healthy person. These instances point out the fact that considering compensation is necessary and that the 'eye for an eye' rule is faulty and unreliable.
The Jewish tradition has adamantly yet gradually and effectively embraced the replacement of strict capital punishment with pecuniary compensation. These changes are in accordance with the current World Human Rights regulations. With time, engagement in more diverse activities, civilization, exposure and interaction to the rest of the world, the Jewish authorities have recognized the need to review and amend their law. It is extremely important that the Jewish traditional authorities embraced changes to their law.

References

Jacob Neusner, Between Time and Eternity. Belmont CA: Wadsworth, 1975