Gandhi's comment: 'An eye for an eye makes world blind'
Question:
What will you say to the criticism of Mr. Gandhi "An eye for an eye only ends up making the whole world blind" on Islamic justice system as Holy Quran also mention this. Do you have any strong reason and logic to deny Gandhi this statement or logic?
Answer:
I tremendously respect Mr. Gandhi and consider him to be a role model in many ways.
I think what Mr. Gandhi has said and the rule of Qisas in the Qur’an are two different things.
That ‘eye for an eye’ principle that leaves the whole world blind is on the basis of individually ministered acts of revenge. Accordingly when one kills another person, one of his relatives takes revenge and kills the murderer. This then results in one of the relatives of the murderer to kill the second murderer and the ball rolls on forever or for a long time. This is certainly against any moral values.
However according to the Shari’ah of the Qur’an, in the case of unjust murder the state (not and individual) can implement qisas. This is only if the relatives of the victim do not agree to get blood money instead, and is only applicable if the murder was done intentionally and there are no reasons for discount in the punishment.
If the above is implemented correctly then it is beyond imagination that the relatives of the executed murderer would seek revenge on the relatives of the victim. After all, it was the state that ruled and implemented the execution.
So as you see what the Qur’an has instructed and what Gandhi has said are about two different scenarios. In fact, if you read the verses of the Qur’an about Qisas carefully (2:178), you will see that these directives also intended to fix injustice and outlaws with regard to Qisas, that is the scenario that Gandhi was condemning too. Also note that the same verse makes Qisas optional, as it also opens the option of asking for blood money rather than Qisas.
On a more fundamental basis, in my understanding the penal law of Islam (along with other laws like social law) were never intended to be permanent and universally applicable. These categories of laws were given in a way thay they suited the norms of the time and the location (Arabia, around 1400 years ago). We need to appreciate what the wisdom behind the law was (justice and ultimately improving purification) and then, where needed, we have to adapt and evolve it as appropriate for the time and the location.
--------
September 2015
What will you say to the criticism of Mr. Gandhi "An eye for an eye only ends up making the whole world blind" on Islamic justice system as Holy Quran also mention this. Do you have any strong reason and logic to deny Gandhi this statement or logic?
Answer:
I tremendously respect Mr. Gandhi and consider him to be a role model in many ways.
I think what Mr. Gandhi has said and the rule of Qisas in the Qur’an are two different things.
That ‘eye for an eye’ principle that leaves the whole world blind is on the basis of individually ministered acts of revenge. Accordingly when one kills another person, one of his relatives takes revenge and kills the murderer. This then results in one of the relatives of the murderer to kill the second murderer and the ball rolls on forever or for a long time. This is certainly against any moral values.
However according to the Shari’ah of the Qur’an, in the case of unjust murder the state (not and individual) can implement qisas. This is only if the relatives of the victim do not agree to get blood money instead, and is only applicable if the murder was done intentionally and there are no reasons for discount in the punishment.
If the above is implemented correctly then it is beyond imagination that the relatives of the executed murderer would seek revenge on the relatives of the victim. After all, it was the state that ruled and implemented the execution.
So as you see what the Qur’an has instructed and what Gandhi has said are about two different scenarios. In fact, if you read the verses of the Qur’an about Qisas carefully (2:178), you will see that these directives also intended to fix injustice and outlaws with regard to Qisas, that is the scenario that Gandhi was condemning too. Also note that the same verse makes Qisas optional, as it also opens the option of asking for blood money rather than Qisas.
On a more fundamental basis, in my understanding the penal law of Islam (along with other laws like social law) were never intended to be permanent and universally applicable. These categories of laws were given in a way thay they suited the norms of the time and the location (Arabia, around 1400 years ago). We need to appreciate what the wisdom behind the law was (justice and ultimately improving purification) and then, where needed, we have to adapt and evolve it as appropriate for the time and the location.
--------
September 2015
