The Mishnah on daf TB Nedarim 35b lists tasks that one may perform for someone who is prohibited by vow from benefiting from him. One of the tasks differentiates teaching the written Torah (תורה שבכתב) and the oral Torah (תורה שבעל פה). “And he teaches him midrash, halakhot, and aggadot, but he may not teach him Bible. However, he may teach his sons and daughters Bible.” (Sefaria.org translation) One obvious question is why can’t he teach the written Torah, but allowed to teach the oral Torah? The obvious second question is why he is permitted to teach the written Torah to the children of the one who is prohibited by a vow from benefiting from the teacher. Starting with yesterday’s daf and continuing on today’s daf TB Nedarim 37, the Gemara provides the answers.
Ҥ We learned in the mishna that
one teaches someone who is prohibited by vow from benefiting from him midrash,
halakhot, and aggadot (i.e. oral Torah-תורה שבעל פה-gg), but he may not teach
him Bible. The Gemara asks: What is the reason that he may not teach him
Bible? Is it due to the fact that the teacher benefits
the one for whom benefit from him is forbidden by teaching him Bible? When he
teaches him midrash he also benefits him. Shmuel said: The mishna is
referring to a place where one takes payment for teaching Bible and
one does not take payment for teaching midrash. By teaching him
Bible, the one for whom benefit is forbidden, benefits from the fact that he
does not pay. The Gemara asks: Why was the halakha stated without
qualification? There is no apparent fundamental difference between Bible
and midrash. Why did the mishna refer specifically to a case where payment is
taken for teaching Bible?
“The Gemara
answers: This teaches us that even in a place where one takes payment
for teaching, for teaching Bible it is permitted to take
payment, but for teaching midrash it is not permitted to take
payment.
“The Gemara asks: In what way is
midrash different from Bible, that one may not take payment
for teaching it? Based on that which is written, which Moses said to the
people: “And the Lord commanded me at that time to teach you statutes
and laws” (Deuteronomy 4:14), and also that which is written:
“Behold, I have taught you statutes and laws, as the Lord my God commanded
me, that you should do so in the midst of the land where you go in to
possess it” (Deuteronomy 4:5), God said: Just as I teach you for
free, without payment, so too you also shall teach for free.
There should be no difference between Bible and midrash, and Bible too,
like midrash, should be taught for free.” (Sefaria.org translation)
If Moses is our paradigm, he also
taught Israel the written Torah for free. How can a person except payment for
teaching Torah? The Gemara provides two possible answers. According to Pirke
Avot 5:21, one begins teaching his child the written Torah when he reaches the
age of five years old. The answer is simple to our question. One does not
accept payment for teaching Torah, but accepts money for doing something else
at the same time. “Rav said: As Bible is typically taught to children,
one who teaches Bible takes payment for watching the children. And
Rabbi
Yoḥanan said: He takes payment for teaching punctuation
of the text with cantillation notes.”
(Sefaria.org translation)
A teacher of young children has a
responsibility to guard his students from any harm above and beyond teaching
them Torah. According to Rav, the teacher accepts payment for “babysitting” and
not for teaching the Torah itself. Adults don’t need “babysitting “when
studying Torah; consequently, the teacher may not charge a fee for teaching
Torah.
Anybody who has ever read from the
Torah knows that the Torah scroll has no vocalization[1]
or cantillation marks[2].
According to Rabbi Yoḥanan the vocalization and the cantillation marks are not part of the original
Torah tradition from Mount Sinai. Consequently, there is no prohibition for
accepting a fee to teach the vocalization and cantillation marks while at the
same time teaching Torah for free.
No comments:
Post a Comment