One of the main problems for the doctrine of the traditional view of hell is Proportionality objection. It claims that eternal punishments for finite crimes of human beings cause undue harm and therefore are incompatible with divine justice. The proportionality principle states that the degree of punishment that a person justly merits must be proportionate to the level of his wrongdoing. One of the common ways to respond to this objection is rejecting the retributive nature of hell. Morteza Motahhari denied retributivism by distinguishing between the criminal system of the world and hereafter. He believed punishments in hell are identical to human deeds and they are nothing more than spiritual aspect of them. Regarding this view which is called 'Self-imposed punishments', God is not the punisher of the sinners, and the residents of hell suffer from their sinful actions. This paper begins with examining Motahhari's metaphysical theory of punishment as a theodicy of hell. Then I will discuss a modal argument against his theory. I shall argue there is not a necessary correlation between crimes and punishments. My conclusion is that Motahhari's theodicy would be undermined God's moral perfection either therefore it does not get God off the moral hook.
