Originally, it was customary for the community to impose taxes to pay for the education of all the children, whether their parents were rich or poor. However, at present it has become customary for each parent to pay for his own child's education. However, if he lacks the financial means to do so, the community is obligated to accept this burden.
If a village does not have children who study Torah, its populace is placed under a ban of ostracism2See Chapter 7, Halachah 5 for a precise definition of this term. until they employ teachers for the children. If3these measures do not motivate the inhabitants to change their ways and.... they do not employ teachers, the village [deserves to be] destroyed,4The Rambam's statements are based on Shabbat 119b. Though our text of that passage differs slightly from the statements here, in the various commentaries and codes (e.g., the She'eltot of Rabbenu Achai Gaon, the Halachot of Rabbenu Yitzchak Alfasi), we find various versions of that passage. Hence, it is possible to assume that the Rambam's statements are a quote from his text of the Talmud. since the world exists only by virtue of the breath coming from the mouths of children who study Torah.5for their breath is not tainted by sin (Shabbat, ibid.). Based on the latter statement, some authorities require the community to support children's study only until they reach bar-mitzvah, since afterwards they no longer possess this quality.
At present, it is customary to send children to school at much earlier ages. They are not subjected to such a rigorous schedule and much of the time is devoted to activities other than actual study. Nevertheless, their presence in school is important to develop their character and commitment to Jewish values.
A teacher may employ corporal punishment to cast fear upon [the students].5The advice that Proverbs 13:24 gives a father: "He that spares the rod, hates his son," also applies to a teacher. Indeed, Makkot 8a equates a teacher to a father in this respect.
Makkot 22b relates that Zechariah 13:6, "What are these wounds?...Those which I was wounded in the house of my beloved," refers to the beatings administered to school children.
See also Chapter 3, Halachah 12 and Chapter 4, Halachah 5. However, he should not beat them cruelly, like an enemy.6Note the parallel of this expression to Jeremiah 30:14. Note also Chapter 4, Halachot 4-5, which recommend restraint and patience on the teacher's part. Therefore, he should not beat them with a rod or a staff, but rather with a small strap.7Bava Batra (ibid.) relates that Rav instructed Rav Shmuel bar Shilat (a well known teacher of children): When you beat a child, beat him only with a sandal strap. If [it motivates him] to study, then he will study. If he does not study, let him be in the company of the others. From Rav's words, we can infer that corporal punishment may be employed to try to motivate a student to be more attentive. However, if it does not prove to be a successful tool, it should not be used further, lest it create a permanent aversion to Torah study.
[The teacher] should sit and instruct them the entire day and for a portion of the night, to train them to study during the day and night.8So that as adults, they will be accustomed to fulfilling the obligation mentioned in Chapter 1, Halachah 8. The children should not neglect [their studies] at all, except at the end of the day on the eve of the Sabbaths and festivals9i.e., they should study on the mornings of these days, but not in the afternoons.
The commentaries have questioned the source for the Rambam's statements. Some have pointed to Sukkah 28a, which praises Rabbi Yochanan ben Zakkai for never leaving the house of study except on the eve of Pesach and the eve of Yom Kippur. Similarly, Pesachim 109a applies such praise to Rabbi Akiva. However, it is difficult to say that these are the sources for the Rambam's statements. Firstly, the passages refer to adults and not to children. Also, the fact that these passages cite the behavior of these Sages as worthy of praise seems to imply that it was exceptional and not the rule followed by most. and on the festivals themselves.10for study might disturb a child's conception of the air of rejoicing and celebration that must accompany the festivals. It must be noted that the Rambam suggests that adults use some of their time on the festivals to study (Hilchot Sh'vitat Yom Tov 6:19). On the Sabbath,11They should not cease their studies. Nevertheless... they should not begin new material.12for grasping it may involve difficulty and strain, which should be avoided on the Sabbath. (See Nedarim 37a.) However, they should review what was learned already.13for this does not involve tremendous strain.
The children should never be interrupted from their studies, even for the building of the Temple.14Shabbat 119b makes this statement in the context of its description of the great merit of the children's study, as mentioned in the previous halachah. Indeed, this appears to be the Rambam's logic in the entire halachah. Since children's study is so important, no unnecessary interruptions should be made.
This rigorous schedule of study is not followed today. Among the reasons given are the different goals for Torah study at present from those in the previous generations, as described in the commentary on Chapter 1, Halachah 12. Alternatively, if today youth were subjected to such a schedule, they might rebel and no value would come of it.
Rav Shmuel answered him: "You haven't seen me [strolling like this] for thirteen years. Furthermore, even now I am thinking about them." or [remains] with them but performs other work,2The commentaries have explained the source for this halachah as follows:
The Jerusalem Talmud (D'mai 7:3) relates that Rabbi Yochanan encountered a teacher who looked emaciated. When the Sage enquired about him, his colleagues explained that he fasted. Rabbi Yochanan was very critical: "If a normal hired worker is forbidden to undergo penances lest he not produce as much as desired, how much more so does this apply to someone doing God's work."
Accordingly, since we find that a person hired to do one job should not perform another at the same time (Tosefta, Bava Metzia 4:7), it can be assumed that a teacher should refrain from doing so. or is lazy in their instruction,3As is obvious from Hilchot S'chirut 10:7, this includes two elements:a) one who did not instruct the students; orb) one who erred in their instruction. is included in [the admonition (Jeremiah 48:10)]: "Cursed be he who performs God's work deceitfully.” Therefore, it is only proper to select a teacher who is God-fearing, teaches them at a fast pace,4In his commentary on Halachah 6, the Kessef Mishneh interprets mahir as one who teaches a large quantity of material. In his commentary on Psalms 45:2, Rav Sa'adiah Gaon translates that word as "expert." and instructs them carefully.5Bava Batra 21a-b emphasizes the importance of precise study by relating the following story: After Yoav returned from slaying all the males of Edom (II Samuel 11:16), King David asked him to explain his actions. He replied: "Doesn't Deuteronomy 25:19 state 'Wipe out all the males (zachor) of Amalek?’“ David told him: "You are mistaken; the verse reads 'Wipe out the memory (zecher) of Amalek.’“ Yoav told him: "I learned zachor." Later, Yoav sought out his teacher and chastised him severely for his carelessness.
Some authorities maintain that these prohibitions apply only to the classrooms of previous generations, which were often private and quite secluded. In contrast, they maintain that no prohibition exists in today's large schools. However, it is questionable if that conclusion can be reached in view of the text of Hilchot Issurei Bi'ah.
Shulchan Aruch HaRav (Hilchot Talmud Torah 1:3) states that the above applies only to instruction in the Written Law. Instruction in the more complicated realms of study requires even smaller classes. However, a parent cannot demand that such instruction be provided from communal funds.
As explained in the commentary on Halachot 1:12, 2:2, today the goals of study differ from those of the previous generations. On that basis, some schoolmasters excuse their willingness to exceed the limits on the teacher-student ratio mentioned here. Others state that they would like to establish such a ratio, but financial pressures prevent them from doing so.
From the time of Rabbi Yehoshua ben Gamla, a child was not transferred from city to city, but he would be transferred from synagogue to synagogue...
The Rambam interprets that statement to mean that once the practice of employing qualified teachers in each community was instituted, there was no longer a need to transfer a child from his home town to another city. However, within his city itself, he could be transferred from one house of study to another if there was adequate reason. and there is not a river between them. However, a child should not be forced to travel from city to city,4because of the difficulty involved in the journey or even from one side of the river to the other in the same city,5because of the danger involved. unless there is a strong bridge, which is not likely to fall readily, over the river.
Similarly, should one teacher of children come and open a schoolroom next to the place [where] a colleague [was teaching], so that other children will come to him or so that the children [studying under his] colleague shall come to him, his colleague may not lodge a protest against him,1though such a practice would not be allowed in any other profession [if the new competitor came from a different country (see Hilchot Sh'chenim 6:8)], an exception is made regarding teaching Torah because... as [Isaiah 42:21 states]: "God desired, for the sake of His righteousness, to make the Torah great and glorious."2Bava Batra 21a, the source for this halachah, does not quote this verse, but rather explains: "the envy of the teachers will increase knowledge."
The Yad Malachi explains that the Rambam frequently substitutes a different verse or explanation for the one quoted by the Talmud if he feels that his choice is more explanatory. However, the advantage of the verse chosen by the Rambam over the reason given by the Talmud requires explanation.
This law has two dimensions: one relevant to the laws governing the consideration neighbors must afford each other and the possibility of competition between them, and one relevant to the laws of Torah study. The Talmudic passage cited above deals primarily with the rights of neighbors. Thus, it explains to a person who might feel that a colleague has overstepped his rights that he, himself, will benefit, because the spirit of competition will motivate him to increase his own Torah knowledge. In contrast, in these halachot the Rambam deals primarily with the importance of Torah study. Hence, he quotes a verse which emphasizes how important the increase of Torah study is (Likkutei Sichot, Vol. VI, p. 299).
הלכות תלמוד תורה פרק ב
א) מושיבין מלמדי תינוקות בכל מדינה ומדינה, ובכל פלך ופלך. וכל עיר שאין בה תינוקות של בית רבן -- מחרימין את אנשי העיר, עד שמושיבין מלמדי תינוקות; ואם לא הושיבו, מחריבין את העיר: שאין העולם מתקיים, אלא בהבל פיהם של תינוקות של בית רבן.
ב) מכניסין את התינוקות להתלמד כבן שש כבן שבע, לפי כוח הבן ובניין גופו; ופחות מבן שש, אין מכניסים אותו. ומכה אותן המלמד, להטיל עליהן אימה. ואינו מכה אותן מכת אויב, מוסר אכזרי; לפיכך לא יכה אותן בשוטים ולא במקלות, אלא ברצועה קטנה.
ג) ויושב ומלמדן כל היום כולו, ומקצת מן הלילה -- כדי לחנכן ללמוד ביום, ובלילה. ולא ייבטלו התינוקות כלל, חוץ מערבי שבתות וערבי ימים טובים בסוף היום, ובימים טובים; אבל בשבת, אין קורין לכתחילה, אבל שונין לראשון. ואין מבטלין התינוקות, ואפילו לבניין בית המקדש.
ד) [ג] מלמד התינוקות שהוא מניח התינוקות ויוצא, או שהוא עושה מלאכה אחרת עימהן, או שהוא מתרשל בלימודן -- הרי הוא בכלל "ארור עושה מלאכת ה', רמייה" (ירמיהו מח,י). לפיכך אין ראוי להושיב מלמד אלא בעל יראה, מהיר לקרות ולדקדק. [ד] ומי שאין לו אישה -- לא ילמד תינוקות, מפני אימותיהן שהן באין אצל בניהן; וכן אישה -- לא תלמד תינוקות, מפני אבותיהן שהן באין אצל הבנים.
ה) עשרים וחמישה תינוקות, למדים אצל מלמד אחד. היו יותר על עשרים וחמישה -- עד ארבעים, מושיבין עימו אחר לסייעו בלימודן; היו יותר על ארבעים, מעמידין להן שני מלמדי תינוקות.
ו) מוליכין את הקטן ממלמד למלמד אחר שהוא מהיר ממנו, בין במקרא בין בדקדוק. במה דברים אמורים, בשהיו שניהן בעיר אחת, ולא היה הנהר מפסיק ביניהן; אבל מעיר לעיר, או מצד הנהר לצידו אפילו באותה העיר -- אין מוליכין את הקטן, אלא אם כן היה בניין בריא על גבי הנהר, בניין שאינו ראוי ליפול במהרה.
ז) אחד מבני מבוי שביקש להיעשות מלמד, אפילו אחד מבני החצר -- אין יכולין שכניו למחות בידו. וכן מלמד תינוקות שבא חברו ופתח בית ללמד תינוקות בצידו כדי שיבואו תינוקות אחרים, או כדי שיבואו מתינוקות של זה אצל זה -- אינו יכול למחות בידו, שנאמר "ה' חפץ, למען צדקו; יגדיל תורה, ויאדיר" (ישעיהו מב,כא).




