Much the same considerations apply to Pirkei Avot. Do its
moral precepts form a binding code of conduct, to be honoured and respected by
all? Or is it simply a list of preferences that any individual can respect or
discard at his discretion? Rabbi Elazar Ezkari in his Sefer Charedim,
regards much of the content of Avot as binding law, but most other scholars
take a more flexible view.
Conceived for children’s entertainment, this Pirates of
the Caribbean movie can actually be a valuable didactic tool in explaining
how law and morality affects any self-regulating minority. At the top of the
tree, as it were, it depicts norms that are universally binding, both on the
population at large and on pirates. The obvious example are the laws that make
piracy illegal and require the punishment of pirates. Then, by analogy to norms
that are relevant only to Jews, there are norms that are applicable only to
pirates. Thus the Pirates’ Code is addressed only to pirates and may only be
invoked by them. And, similarly to Pirkei Avot, the Pirates’ Code is observed
strictly by some but viewed by others as mere guidance.
The analogy between the Pirates’ Code and Pirkei Avot cannot
however be stretched too far. It is plain from the movie that, when a pirate
treats the Code as mere guidance, he does so in order to further his
self-interest. With Avot, however, it is understood that the breach of any of
its provisions should only be done with the objective of performing some
greater good. An obvious example is the advice to greet everyone with a happy,
smiling face (Avot 1:15) since we sadly encounter many situations in life in
which a more solemn demeanour is more appropriate.
Incidentally, in Gilbert & Sullivan’s comic opera The Pirates of Penzance, the position taken by the librettist is apparently that obligations entered into between pirates are regarded as being absolutely binding precisely because they are a matter of honour rather than legally enforceable commitments.
