Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, (Exodus 21:24 – King James Version)
eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, (Exodus 21:24 – American Standard Version)
eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, (Exodus 21:24 – Darby’s Translation)
eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, (Exodus 21:24 – Young’s Literal Translation)
eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, (Exodus 21:24 – World English Bible)
Interlinear
Eye <`ayin> for eye, <`ayin> tooth <shen> for tooth, <shen> hand <yad> for hand, <yad> foot <regel> for foot, <regel>
Matthew Poole’s Commentary
Ver. 24. This is called the law of retaliation, and from hence the heathen lawgivers took it and put it into their laws. But though this might sometimes be practised in the letter, yet it was not necessarily to be understood and executed so; as may appear,
1. By the impossibility of the just execution of it in many cases, as when a man that had but one eye or hand was to lose the other, which to him was a far greater mischief than what he did to his neighbour, whom he deprived but of one of his eyes or hands. And this is a sure and righteous rule, Punishments may be less, but never should be greater than the fault. And how could a wound be made neither bigger nor less than that which he inflicted?
2. By comparing this with other laws, wherein a compensation is allowed in like cases, as Ex 21:18,30. And when it is enjoined that no satisfaction shall be taken for the life of a wilful murderer, Nu 35:31, it seems therein implied that satisfaction may be taken for lesser injuries. And indeed the payment of such a price as the loss of an eye, or hand, or foot required, though it might not so much satisfy the revenge of the party so injured, yet it was really more to his benefit. This law therefore was only minatory, but so as it was literally to be inflicted, except the injuring party would give such satisfaction as the injured person accepted, or the judges determined.