רְ אֵּה לִמַדְתִי אֶתְכֶם חֻקִים וּמִשְפָ טִים כַאֲשֶר צִוַּנִי ה' אֱלֹקי לַעֲשוֹת כֵּן בְקֶרֶב הָאָרֶץ אֲשֶר אַתֶם בָאִים שָמָה לְרִ שְתָהּ: (דברים ד,ה)
The Mishnah ruled that it is prohibited for a person to take wages for his service as a judge, to act as a witness, or to blend the waters of a Parah Adumah. The Gemara identifies the verse in Devarim (4,5) as the source for this halacha. Moshe Rabeinu said, “Behold, see that I have taught you statutes and laws.” We learn that this means that Moshe was informing them that just as he served the Jewish people without being paid, so too, all community services should be fulfilled following his example and salaries should not be taken.
Rashi explains that the verse in Devarim is referring only to not taking money for judging or for teaching Torah. According to Rashi, where is the source not to take money for all the other services mentioned in the Mishnah?
Machane Ephraim explains that Rashi understood that it is obvious that a person would have to judge or testify or mix the parah adumah waters without pay, as these are necessary and obligatory tasks. Teaching Torah to others outside one’s own sons, however, is not an obligation, when a person wishes to learn for himself. If someone avails himself to study with and teach others we might have thought that pay would be appropriate. This is why the verse teaches us that no pay should be taken for this.
Mahar”i ben Lev explains that Rashi is indicating that in regard to teaching the only issue is not to take a salary. This is something where the only concern is that it must be done for free. In regard to the other activities mentioned in the Mishnah taking money would undermine one’s participation. One who accepts money would have his judgments become disqualified and his testimony would no longer be credible.
Cheishek Shlomo says that the verse in Devarim only teaches us not to take money for teaching and learning Torah, and not for other mitzvos. The halacha that one does not to take money for testifying is only rabbinic, and so is the restriction not to take money for other mitzvos.
The Rishonim offer many explanations why nowadays we say that one who teaches Torah may accept a salary. Tosafos says that it is permitted for one to accept a salary for learning Torah is he has no other vocation or pursuit other than learning. Also, if someone is able to support himself, but he agrees to abandon his wage-earning skills in order to teach, he may be paid a salary in lieu of his willing to not work. Furthermore, we may say about one who teaches children that he is not paid for the teaching itself, but rather for his service of watching and guarding the young children. Also, he is paid for teaching the sounding of the ta’amei hamikrah, and not for the translation and meaning of the words. This aspect of teaching does not have to be for free.
The idea that accepting payment for teaching Torah is a problem is articulated most clearly by the Rambam in his commentary to Pirkei Avos (4:5) and in his Mishneh Torah (Hilchos Talmud Torah, 3:10).
The Mishnah in Pirkei Avos teaches: Rabbi Tzaddok would say: Do not separate yourself from the community. Do not act as a counselor-at-law (when serving as a judge). Do not make the Torah a crown to magnify yourself with, or a spade with which to dig. So would Hillel say, “One who makes personal use of the crown of Torah shall perish.” Hence, one who benefits himself from the words of Torah, removes his life from the world.
Based on this, the Rambam rules: Anyone who comes to the conclusion that he should involve himself in Torah study without doing work and derive his livelihood from charity, desecrates G-d's name, dishonors the Torah, extinguishes the light of faith, brings evil upon himself, and forfeits the life of the world to come, for it is forbidden to derive benefit from the words of Torah in this world.
Our Sages declared, "Whoever benefits from the words of Torah forfeits his life in the world." Also, they declared, "Do not make them a crown to magnify oneself, nor an axe to chop with." Further, they declared, "Love work and despise Rabbinic positions." All Torah that is not accompanied by work will eventually be negated and lead to sin. Ultimately, such a person will steal from others.
It is a tremendous advantage for a person to derive his livelihood from his own efforts. This attribute was possessed by the pious of the early generations. In this manner, one will merit all types of honor and benefit in this world and in the world to come, as [Tehillim 128,2] states: "If you eat the toil of your hands, you will be happy and it will be good for you." "You will be happy" - in this world. "It will be good for you" - in the world to come, which is entirely good.
In What Circumstances Is One Permitted to Receive a Wage for Teaching Torah?
- (a) In the Gemara in Nedarim (37a), Rebbi Yochanan rules that one is permitted to receive a wage for teaching the "Pisuk Ta'amim" (the cantillation marks on the words in the Chumash), since those notes are not mid'Oraisa. Rebbi Yochanan's ruling implies that one is permitted to receive a wage for teaching Halachos or Mitzvos that are mid'Rabanan. The HAGAHOS MAIMONIYOS (Hilchos Talmud Torah 1, cited by the REMA YD 246:5) writes that one therefore is permitted to receive a wage for teaching rabbinical enactments.
- (b) The Gemara in Nedarim (37a) states that one who teaches small children who need to be watched may receive a wage for teaching them, since the salary is paid not for the teaching but for the supervision. The Gemara assumes that adults, and even young girls (who tend to be more mature and independent than young boys), do not need to be watched, and thus one may not receive a wage for teaching them. (See the ROSH in Nedarim who writes that little children need to be kept off the streets so that they will not cause damage and become accustomed to doing bad things.) Obviously, in a place where young girls and older children need to be supervised, their teacher may receive a wage.
- (c) The RAN in Nedarim and other Rishonim quote the Yerushalmi which says that one who chooses to teach Torah at the expense of working in a profession may receive a wage to compensate for the loss of income that he incurs as a result of teaching. In such a case, he does not take money for the teaching but for not working.
- (d) TOSFOS here (DH Mah Ani) and the ROSH write that one who has no other source of income may receive a wage for teaching.
HALACHAH: The SHULCHAN ARUCH (YD 246:5) rules that nowadays teachers may receive salaries for teaching Torah for the abovementioned reasons.
When the Gemara cites the source for not accepting payment as being the requirement to model G-d and do it for free, Rashi gives the examples of authorizing a p'sak i.e. din, and teaching Torah. Rashi fails to mention the issue of testifying and preparing the Parah Adumah waters. The Cheishek Shlomo suggests that accepting payment to testify according to Rashi is only prohibited m'drabonon, not from the Torah. If it were forbidden m'doraysa it would be tantamount to a witness taking money to testify falsely categorizing him as a רשע דחמס and being passul for all testimony. The Mishna implies that we only invalidate this testimony, implying that his violation isn't d'oraysa. It also isn't clear from Rashi whether payment for other mitzvos is forbidden m'doraysa or only m'drabonon.
The Rashash cites the Bartneura who elaborates about those who officiate Gittin and take payment. He is assuming that sidur ha'get qualifies as din and would invalidate the get. However, the Rama (E.H. 154) says that it doesn't qualify as din, just as Limud haTorah. The Rashash points out that this would justify the get being kosher, but he wouldn't justify the practice to accept payment for officiating a get since it would still be a violation of מה אני בחנם אף אתם בחנם as we find by Talmud Torah. Tosafos justifies those who take payment for studying Torah based on the דייני גזירות in Yerushalayim who relied on this for their livelihood and therefore became the community responsibility to support them so that they can maintain their important work. This logic may also apply to mesadrei gittin or those who do other Mitzvos, i.e., milah, for their livelihood. Someone asked me how I can charge to do a bris - I answered that the mitzvah of bris milah is to cut. I don't charge for the mitzvah of doing a bris, I only charge for stopping the bleeding. (by Rabbi Avi Lebowitz)
