Bava Batra 21a (כא.) — the Talmud in English

The latter clause comes to teach the case of children who study in the schoolhouse.

Actually, the latter clause is speaking of the same courtyard, and it is not speaking of children who come to purchase something, but of children who come to study Torah with their teacher. And even though he increases the number of people entering and leaving that courtyard, in any event, it is impossible to protest against him,

and from the enactment of Yehoshua ben Gamla onward,

the reason that they cannot protest against him is that the Mishna is speaking after the enactment of Yehoshua ben Gamla.

As Rav Yehuda said in the name of Rav: Indeed,

in truth,

that man is remembered for the good, and Yehoshua ben Gamla was his name,

he was the High Priest during the period of the Second Temple,

for had it not been for him, Torah would have been forgotten from Israel. Initially, one whose father had him taught Torah,

one who had a father capable of teaching him was taught by him,

but one who had no father

capable of teaching him

did not study Torah.

What exposition did they derive?

What did they expound, assuming that only a father teaches his son?

“And you shall teach them”—read it: “and you shall teach yourselves.”

What the verse says, “And you shall teach them,” they expounded the word “them” as though it said “you”: You yourselves shall teach your sons.

They instituted that teachers of children should be established in Jerusalem.

What exposition did they derive

from where did they derive that teachers of children should be established only in Jerusalem? “

For from Zion shall the Torah go forth”

and so on,

as the continuation is, “and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem,” indicating that Torah should be in Zion and Jerusalem. Since there they would see the priests engaged in the Temple service, and everyone engaged in the work of Heaven, he too would direct his heart toward fear of Heaven and engage in Torah.

And still, one who had a father would bring him up

to Jerusalem

and teach him; but one who had no father would not go up and study. They instituted that teachers of children should be established in every district,

in every land containing several provinces and towns.

And they would admit him at the age of sixteen or seventeen,

because younger children found it difficult to travel from the place where they lived to the place where the teachers taught.

And one whose teacher became angry with him would rebel against him and leave.

Since they had not become accustomed from childhood to sitting and engaging in Torah study.

Until Yehoshua ben Gamla came and instituted

together with the Sages of his generation

that teachers of children should be established in every province and in every city, and that they should be admitted at the age of six or seven.

At approximately six for a healthy child and approximately seven for a frail one.

And once Yehoshua ben Gamla instituted this, the neighbors cannot prevent it, since it is a mitzva.

Rav said to Rav Shmuel bar Shilat

who was a teacher of children:

Until six, do not accept him. From then onward, accept him, and stuff him like an ox.

Until the age of six, do not accept him for instruction, because he is not yet capable of enduring the exertion of study. But from the age of six accept him and teach him Torah against his will, just as one feeds and gives drink to an ox against its will, or just as one places a yoke on an ox’s neck against its will.

And Rav said to Rav Shmuel bar Shilat: When you strike a child,

when you hit a child,

strike him only with a sandal strap,

do not strike him with anything other than a strap from a shoe; that is, he should give only a light blow, so that the child is not injured.

One who reads should read,

one who reads and studies should continue studying,

but one who does not read should be a companion to his fellow.

One who does not wish to read and study need not be disciplined excessively, nor should he be dismissed. Rather, he should sit together with the others, and eventually he will take an interest.

Meytivi

against Rava from a beraita:

One of the members of a courtyard who seeks to become a doctor,

who wishes to become a doctor, meaning a circumciser,

a bloodletter,

one who lets blood,

or a weaver,

one who spins threads,

or a teacher of children, the members of the courtyard may prevent

him.

The members of the courtyard may prevent him because he increases the number of people entering and leaving the courtyard.

And it is clear here that they may also prevent a teacher of children from doing so, which is difficult for Rava, who explains the latter clause of the Mishna as referring to a teacher of children whom they cannot prevent.

The Gemara answers: With what are we dealing here?

With children of gentiles,

here it is speaking of one who teaches gentile children a craft or something similar. But one who teaches Jewish children Torah cannot be prevented.

Ta shma

a proof, from what we learned:

If two people are sitting in a courtyard and one of them seeks to become a doctor, a bloodletter, a weaver, or a teacher of children, the other may prevent him.

This is difficult for Rava from the case of a teacher of children.

The Gemara answers:

Here too, it is speaking of children of gentiles.

Here also, it is speaking of gentile children.

Ta shma

a proof, from what we learned:

One who has a house in a jointly owned courtyard may not rent it to a doctor, a bloodletter, a weaver, a Jewish scribe, or an Aramaic scribe.

And the Gemara understood that “scribe” means a teacher of children, whether he is Jewish and teaches children Torah, or whether he is a gentile and teaches children a craft or something similar. The reason in all these cases is that he increases the number of people entering and leaving the courtyard. This is difficult for Rava from the case of a Jewish scribe.

The Gemara answers:

With what are we dealing here? With the scribe of the city.

Here it is speaking of a teacher of all the children of the city—that is, one appointed over all the city’s teachers, instructing them how to teach. There is a great commotion there, as all the teachers and children come to him; in such a case, one may protest against him.

Rava said: From the enactment of Yehoshua ben Gamla onward, we do not transport a child from one town to another.

From the enactment of Yehoshua ben Gamla, which established teachers of children in every city, children are not brought from one place to another, so that they will not be endangered on the roads. Rather, teachers are established in every place.

But we may transport them from one synagogue to another synagogue.

They may be brought from one synagogue to another within the same city.

And if a river interrupts the way, we do not transport them,

if there is a river separating one synagogue from the other, they are not brought, because crossing the river is dangerous.

But if there is a bridge, we transport them,

if there is a wide bridge over the river, they may be brought, because crossing the river is not dangerous when there is a wide bridge.

But if there is a narrow footbridge, we do not transport them.

If there is a narrow bridge, they are not brought, because this entails danger.

And Rava said: The maximum number of children for one teacher is twenty-five,

the number of children suitable for one teacher is twenty-five. When there are fewer than this, the townspeople cannot compel one another to hire a teacher for them.

And if there are fifty, we establish two teachers.

If there are fifty children, two teachers are established.

And if there are forty, we appoint a head assistant,

if there are forty, an assistant to the teacher is appointed. He listens to the teacher and repeats his words before the students, so that the material will be fluent on their tongues. And the head assistant receives a salary.

And the town assists him.

The townspeople assist the teacher by contributing toward the support of the head assistant, and the teacher’s salary is not reduced on account of supporting the head assistant.

And Rava said: If this teacher of children reads well, while there is another who reads better than he,

if the townspeople hired one teacher who knows how to teach, and afterward another came who knows how to teach better than the first,

we do not dismiss him, lest he come to neglect his duties.

We do not dismiss the first teacher, lest the second become arrogant in his heart, thinking that there is no one like him, and consequently become lax in teaching the children properly, since he will no longer fear that he might be dismissed.

Rav Dimi of Nehardea said: All the more so, if the second reads better; the jealousy of scholars increases wisdom.

Once the second is considered, the first will take care to teach well, because he fears the jealousy of his fellow, who was dismissed on his account and might shame him before the townspeople if he does not teach well.

And Rava said: In the case of these two teachers of children, one reads extensively but is not precise, and one is precise but does not read extensively,

if there are two teachers, one who has studied much and knows how to teach well but is not precise in teaching the children, so that they may become confused, and the other who is very precise, ensuring that the children do not become confused, but who has not studied much and does not know a great deal to teach,

we establish the one who reads extensively but is not precise, as errors will leave on their own.

We establish the one who has studied much, even though he is not precise, because over time the children will themselves understand which things they were taught incorrectly and what is correct.

Rav Dimi of Nehardea said: We establish the one who is precise but does not read extensively, because once an error enters, it enters.

We establish the one who is precise, even though he has not studied much, because errors that enter during childhood may remain forever.

As it is written

in the Book of Kings I [chapter 11],

“For Joab and all Israel remained there six months, until he had cut off every male in Edom.”

When he came before David,

when Joab came to David and told him that he had killed all the males in Amalek,

he said to him: