Princess Azula is a morally polarizing character in Avatar: The Last Airbender fandom. Regardless of who you ask, you’re bound to get some strong opinions about exactly what she’s done, the extent to which she’s responsible for it, and what this says about her morality or lack thereof. I’m not going to rehash those arguments. Nevertheless, she’s incredibly compelling, and studying Jewish text is fun, so here we are.
Why examine Azula’s actions through the lens of halacha?
Halacha gets a lot of flack because it comes off as excessively legalistic. But, in my opinion, that’s based on a misunderstanding of what halacha is. Usually translated as “Jewish law,” the word halacha actually comes from the root word that means “to go/walk.”
Halacha is not a collection of rules for the sake of having rules. It’s meant to take us somewhere. You can write a library of books about exactly what that is and what it means. But for the sake of simplicity, halacha is how we show that we recognize the holiness of everything in creation. So we aim to do right by one another, by the land we live in and by the creatures we share this world with.
Before I begin, a few things to keep in mind.
- I am not a Talmud scholar.
- There is no definitive Jewish Opinion™ about any issue pertaining to halacha. Unanimous opinions on halacha are so rare that when we find one, we assume something went wrong in the process.
Before we can launch into examining the halachic ramifications of the things Azula does, we need to establish some boundaries.
- Only the show counts. It’s the common frame of reference universally accepted by the vast majority of fandom. Fandom’s stances on the comics, novelizations and other tie-in materials are too variable to base an analysis on.
- Word of God is immaterial. While some would call this Death of the Author, Jewish tradition has an entertaining take on it with this legend about an argument over an oven.
- We must base our judgment on things we actually see her do or deeds that are strongly inferred to be her doing. We cannot make up things to blame her for just because the show portrays her as a villain. She’s not gleefully drowning kittens when we’re not looking. She’s not torturing or murdering a bunch of people we don’t know about. She does plenty of mean and scary shit without adding to or exaggerating her misdeeds.
Is Azula bound by halacha?
She’s not Jewish, so no. However, all human beings are bound by the Noahide laws. For the sake of argument, let’s say that the Noahide covenant applies to all humans on all worlds. According to the Gemara:
The Sages taught in a baraita: The descendants of Noah, i.e., all of humanity, were commanded to observe seven mitzvot: The mitzva of establishing courts of judgment; and the prohibition against blessing, i.e., cursing, the name of God; and the prohibition of idol worship; and the prohibition against forbidden sexual relations; and the prohibition of bloodshed; and the prohibition of robbery; and the prohibition against eating a limb from a living animal.
Sanhedrin 56a.24
What is Azula’s legal status?
In any case, we know the rules, and now we have to decide whether Azula broke them or not, right?
Not so fast.
First, we have to determine if Azula is of the appropriate legal status to be held accountable for upholding the Noahide laws. In other words: when she committed certain acts, was Azula an adult capable of making rational decisions?
Clear your mind of the idea that being an adult is the same as being a grownup. Instead, think of it as a term that defines when people can make legally binding decisions.
As far as I can tell, the Talmud doesn’t say when a gentile becomes an adult. However, we can use halacha as a guide.
Fair warning
This part talks about genitals in a sex ed kind of way, so if that squicks you out, scroll down to the next section.
According to Maimonides,
From the day of a girl’s birth until she becomes twelve years old, she is called a k’tanah (minor) and/or a tinoket (baby). Even if several [pubic] hairs grow during this time, they are considered to be merely hairs growing from a mole. If, however, two hairs grow in the pubic area after she becomes twelve years old she is considered a na’arah (maiden).
Mishneh Torah, Marriage 2.1
And…
Growing two pubic hairs at this age is referred to as the lower sign [of physical maturity]. Once a girl manifests this sign, she is referred to as a maiden for six months. From the last day of these six months and onward, she is referred to as a bogeret (mature woman).
Mishneh Torah, Marriage 2.2
With regards to legal status, the Rambam says:
All three, a maiden, a mature woman and a barren woman, are referred to by the term gedolah [adult woman]. [Unlike children, they are held responsible for their conduct.]
Mishneh Torah, Marriage 2.6
The show portrays Azula in a range of ages. She’s about eight in “Zuko Alone.” She’s around eleven in “The Storm.” In all her other episodes, she’s fourteen.
A Jewish girl of eight or eleven would be too young to be obligated for mitzvot. Therefore, it’s likely that Azula would likewise be too young to be obligated to follow the Noahide laws. However, at fourteen, she probably would be considered to be of age to be held legally liable for her actions.
Or would she?
What is the real age of majority?
In biblical literature, there are strong hints that people reach full adulthood at age 20. It is at this age when all people become responsible for paying taxes, and men can be conscripted into military service. In other words, the Tanakh strongly suggests that age 20 is the age when humans develop the capacity for making sound judgment calls regarding death and money and thus bear legal responsibility for it.
Azula is at most fourteen years old in the episodes she appears in. This puts her outside the realm of responsibility for these basic functions of “adulting.”
The general impression I’m getting is that before the age of 12, Azula isn’t liable for anything. But the age of 12 to 20 is something of a legal gray area. She’s physically and mentally mature enough to be responsible for following some laws but not necessarily developed enough to be completely on the hook for everything.
If I want to take a lenient approach, I can say that, because she’s too young to be obligated for military service, she’s also too young to be held legally culpable for decisions regarding the proper use of military force.
But if I want to take a more stringent approach, I can say that even at fourteen, she has the capacity to understand that certain things are right, and other things are wrong. Thus, she would be liable for actions that a fourteen-year-old would understand as right or wrong.
Which Noahide laws does Azula actually break?
This is easier and harder than it seems.
The laws about idol worship, cursing God, and forbidden sexual acts don’t apply to her because neither religion nor sex are portrayed as such on the show. The law about establishing courts of justice is a communal obligation, not one that falls on a single individual, so that’s another one we don’t have to concern ourselves with.
That leaves the prohibitions against bloodshed, robbery and eating a limb cut from a living animal.
Bloodshed
The connotation of the prohibition against bloodshed is not for general acts of violence, but actual murder.
Here’s where I think I’m going to throw a lot of people for a loop. Azula doesn’t kill anyone on the show. She tries. She comes close. She wouldn’t lose sleep over it if she did. But nobody’s dead because of her. She doesn’t even take lives as collateral damage.
Aang doesn’t count. He got better. On top of that, halacha does not obligate you to refrain from using lethal force against someone who’s about to kill you. Taking someone out before they can transform into an unstoppable weapon of mass destruction is just plain self-defense.
Eating A Limb From A Living Animal
This prohibition is often expanded to incorporate all forms of animal cruelty.
The show gives us a prime example of animal cruelty with the circus in “Appa’s Lost Days.”
But what about Azula? Maybe when she was in her single digits, she hit a turtleduck or two with a big chunk of bread (not rocks—bread!). How does her treatment of animals measure up when she’s fourteen? Do we see her being cruel to animals then?
No. Never.
Robbery
Given the prescribed punishment (decapitation), the connotation seems to be taking the rightful property of another through violent means. That being said, the prohibition against robbery is often extended to include all sorts of theft.
This one might have some legs. On the show, does Azula take the rightful property of another, and does she use violent means to do so?
Absolutely.
A major example is stealing the clothes of the Kyoshi Warriors after defeating them in combat.
But (and you knew this was coming) …
When Azula and her friends stole the Kyoshi Warriors’ uniforms, they were not muggers or bandits sticking up civilians. It was wartime, and the Kyoshi Warriors were an enemy fighting force, and an elite combat unit at that. Azula and her friends achieve a decisive victory against them. Halachically speaking, their uniforms could be considered the legitimate spoils of war.
The Mishnah says:
The Sages taught in a baraita: Treasures of kings taken as spoils in war belong to the king, and as for the rest of the spoils that are taken in a war, half is for the king and half is for the people. […] This is the typical manner of kings, as it is fitting that the king should use the treasures of the kings he conquers
Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin 20b.20
And Maimonides says:
The property of all those executed by the king, belongs to the king. Similarly, all the treasures belonging to the kings of the kingdoms which he conquers become the property of the king.
In regard to the other spoil which is taken. The soldiers may take spoil. Afterwards, they must bring it to the king. He is entitled to one half of the spoil. He takes this portion first.
The second half of the spoil is divided between the combat soldiers and the people who remained in camp to guard the baggage. An equal division is made between them as I Samuel 30:24 relates: ‘The portion of those who go down to the battle will be as the portion of those who stay with the baggage. They shall divide equally.’
Mishneh Torah, Kings and Wars 4.9
So, long story short: When Azula and her friends fought the Kyoshi Warriors, they were acting in a military capacity against enemy combatants. So, when they won, Azula was allowed to take their stuff.
Back to the original question: which actions does Azula commit during the show that she’s halachically liable for?
The answer, shockingly, may be: none.
The show encourages us to think of Azula as a Very Bad Girl who does Very Bad Things. She’s not someone who inspires warm, fuzzy feelings in most people. She’s calculating, ruthless and deceptive. But when you put her actions under the microscope, she exercises remarkable restraint compared to what she’s capable of, unlike someone like Admiral Zhao.
Don’t worry. No one’s going to nominate her for a Nobel Peace Prize just yet. This is Azula we’re talking about. She’s not acting out of an overwhelming love for humanity. But it is interesting that despite her threats to kill, maim and destroy, she doesn’t participate in wanton destruction or wasteful loss of life.
Bizarro Torah 