In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus says that if a person's right eye causes him to sin, he should tear it out, and if his right hand causes him to sin, he should cut it off. Similar language appears in Mark. The words are so severe that the obvious question is whether Jesus intends them literally.
The saying belongs to a style of teaching in which vivid and sometimes shocking images force the hearer to confront the seriousness of a point. But calling the language figurative does not make the demand behind it mild.
The usual interpretation understands the command as deliberate exaggeration. An eye or hand is not itself the source of moral evil, and removing one body part would not remove a person's capacity to sin. Jesus instead chooses something precious and useful—the eye or hand—to represent whatever contributes to wrongdoing.
The surrounding teaching supports this. In Matthew, Jesus has just moved the discussion of adultery beyond the physical act to the desire of the heart. His concern is therefore deeper than bodily anatomy. The disciple must deal decisively with the sources and occasions of sin rather than merely avoiding its most visible outward expression.
The disturbing imagery also communicates cost. Jesus does not say merely, “Try harder to avoid temptation.” He compares the necessary response to surrendering something as valuable as an eye or hand. Something may be genuinely desirable, familiar, or useful and still need to be abandoned if it repeatedly draws a person toward evil.
Historically, a few readers have taken such language with extreme literalness, but that interpretation encounters the basic problem that physical mutilation does not cure the desires and decisions from which sin arises.
These optional background notes provide additional cultural, historical, linguistic, or scriptural context for this saying.
The saying is best understood as forceful figurative language, but “figurative” should not be mistaken for “unimportant.” The exaggeration is what gives the teaching its force. Jesus is demanding decisive action against sin, even when that action feels like a serious personal loss.
Matthew's context is especially important. Jesus is addressing the heart and its desires, which makes literal removal of an eye or hand an inadequate solution to the very problem he has identified.
The point is not bodily harm but moral seriousness. Jesus challenges the tendency to tolerate habits, situations, or attachments that repeatedly lead toward wrongdoing. His imagery asks a difficult question: what are we willing to give up rather than allow something destructive to govern us?
Provides detailed analysis of the eye/hand saying and its Synoptic parallels, supporting a metaphorical reading especially in Matthew while showing that the classification as simple hyperbole requires some caution.