Our Gemara on amud aleph rules that certain days and times are improper to serve defendants with summons from Bais Din:

We do not set a court date for participants in the kalla, the gatherings for Torah study during Elul and Adar, during the months of the kalla, nor for participants in the public discourses prior to the Festival during the period leading up to the Festival. The Gemara relates: When people would come before Rav Naḥman during the kalla period in order to make legal claims against others, he would say to them: Did I gather you here for your own needs? No, I gathered you to participate in Torah study. The Gemara adds: But now that there are scoundrels, who do not come to study Torah but rather to avoid trial, we are concerned that they will continue to evade prosecution, and therefore we summon them to court even during these time periods.

What is the ethic behind Rav Nachman’s quip?  We could simply say he feels that during this time of study and self-improvement, people should not be involved in legal battles.  In comparison to Torah study, finances are a petty concern and distraction. However, I think there is an additional motivation, and that is so as not to discourage those from coming to study.  Remember, in those days there were no phones or computers.  When a person from the village showed up in the big city, past claims and liens might be imposed on him, which otherwise could have gone by undetected. (The latter part of the above ruling, was the countermeasures to compensate for those who abused this form of amnesty.)

This reminds me of two related chinuch practices of my father Z”L, Rabbi Chaim Feuerman, Ed.D. a master mechanech with a career spanning more than 60 years.  One of his principles was to make sure that children developed an appropriate love and reverence for Torah learning by making every effort to avoid contamination by negative experiences.  Therefore, he would guide teachers to never take away a privilege or reward earned for Torah or mitzvos, even if there was later misbehavior.  This might be ethically compared to the teaching in Berachos (7a): “Rabbi Yoḥanan said in the name of Rabbi Yosei: Every statement to a person or to a nation that emerged from the mouth of the Holy One, Blessed be He, with a promise of good, even if it was conditional, He did not renege on it. Ultimately, every promise made by God will be fulfilled.”

In a second and related principle, my father never would reward studiousness in Torah study with something that was the opposite. For example, he would counsel rebbes who wanted to reward a class for learning well, to NOT give them extra recess. Why should the reward for Torah be freedom from Torah? Instead, my father would “sell” the students on the idea that as a privilege, they get to learn something new and fun (and without being graded or tested on it.) His “go to” was often Malbim, which he found fascinating and engaging, and of course was contaged to the students.  Over his life, from time to time, students of his from decades ago would approach him and say things like, “Rav Feuerman, you know I never really liked learning, and do not learn much Gemara in my adult life.  But I must say, to this day, I love Malbim and learn him on the parasha on Shabbos.”  When you make Torah into something special, it leaves a lifelong imprint.