Nonviolence in the Talmud

Reading “Nonviolence in the Talmud” makes me think of one of my dad’s favorite quotes, “Two wrongs don’t make a right.” He used to say that when my sister and I would bicker. That saying used to annoy me, but now I can see now how insightful it was. The Midrash explains that one should not return evil for good, nor should one return evil for evil. This idea of not returning a negative act with another negative act is at the heart of nonviolent theory and practice.

The Midrash further explains that an act of kindness may offset previous acts of cruelty. In Prov. 3:17, a man’s enemy comes to him in a time of need, and the man assists him. His enemy then reconsiders his previous dislike of the man, and decides that if his enemy is willing to aid him, then he might not be an enemy at all.

“It is not good for the righteous to punish (Prov.17:26).” I enjoy that message mainly because it implies that no moral man or woman has the right to punish. One principle of violent behavior is that those with power have a monopoly on violence. They determine whether or not it is “acceptable” to issue the use of violent acts. I was interested by this proverb because, if no man can use violence as a means of punishment because of moral confines, then violence becomes nearly obsolete. If a government then finds that violence as a means of punishment is unacceptable based on the individual assumption previously stated, offensive violence should hold no place in political practice.

So often in our society, violence is seen as an appropriate measure of controlling those we don’t agree with, or whom we have judged unfit for society. The perfect example of this is capital punishment. We, as a society, take it upon ourselves to decide who lives and dies. If violence was used for defense rather than punishment, the death penalty would not exist, because it would serve no purpose in a society driven by a people who consider violence as a means of punishment unacceptable. Even though evidence against a criminal may seem irrefutable, we are still human and therefore inherently capable of making mistakes. Furthermore, even if the convicted felon was certain to have committed the crime; would not using violence against him merely extend the pain? Gandhi himself said, “An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind.”