In pursuit of piety

A big thank-you to Claude Tusk for reminding us how highly Pirkei Avot was valued by the Amoraim. He writes:

From yesterday's Daf Yomi (Bava Kamma 30a):

אָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה: הַאי מַאן דְּבָעֵי לְמֶהֱוֵי חֲסִידָא – לְקַיֵּים מִילֵּי דִּנְזִיקִין. רָבָא אָמַר: מִילֵּי דְאָבוֹת. וְאָמְרִי לַהּ: מִילֵּי דִּבְרָכוֹת.

[Translation] Rav Yehudah said: “That person who wishes to be a chasid [literally “pious person”] must comply with the laws of damages”.  Rava said: “[That person must comply with] the content of Avot”; still others said: “That person must comply with the content of [the tractate of] Berachot [“Blessings”]”. 

So Avot is in the top three for encouraging piety!

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

This passage from Bava Kamma is often quoted by commentators in their introductions to the tractate, either simply to remind readers of the value of implementing Avot in practice rather than just sitting and learning it or, less often, in order to find a link between the laws on damages, Jewish ethical guidance and the many diverse rules relating to blessings.

Avot itself offers different advice on how to be a chasid: at Avot 6:1 Rabbi Meir lists “being equipped to be a chasid” as a consequence of learning Torah for its own sake – with the proviso that an am ha’aretz cannot become a chasid (Avot 2:2). Avot also provides a few benchmarks against which to establish if a person is a chasid or not: such a person makes his possessions available to others (Avot 5:13), is hard to anger but easy to placate (5:14), happy that both he and others should give to charity (5:16) and who both goes to a house of study and actually studies (5:17).

Here’s a point to ponder. When Rava says that someone who aspires to be a chasid should comply with Avot, does he mean literally the whole of Avot or only the bits that reference who is or is not a chasid? Thoughts, anyone?