Terence Prittie begins by acknowledging that it is natural that a person facing death would ask for “special consideration” (233), particularly in the form of forgiveness for past sins. He goes on to say that Simon, to whom this request was made, was facing death every single day and should have seen Karl’s request as an affront. Prittie says that, as a person of Jewish faith, Simon “could only forgive wrongs done to him personally” (234). The forgiveness Karl sought was from his God, for his crimes against all humanity, not merely against a finite number of individuals. He summarizes by saying that to point out this philosophical idea would be too much to ask a concentration camp inmate and that to pardon on behalf of God would not be within Simon’s authority. By listening to Karl’s story and walking out without speaking, Simon made the best possible choice under the circumstances. 

Matthieu Ricard responds from a Buddhist perspective, stating that, within his belief system, forgiveness is always possible and expected of believers. “In Buddhism,” says Ricard, “forgiveness does not mean absolution, but an opportunity for the inner transformation of both victim and perpetrator” (235).