Arukh HaShulchan Yomi · Expert – Beit Midrash Analysis · Standard

Arukh HaShulchan, Orach Chaim 246:11-17

StandardExpert – Beit Midrash AnalysisJanuary 28, 2026

Sugya Map

This sugya, as illuminated by the Arukh HaShulchan (AHS) in Orach Chaim 246:11-17, grapples with the enduring tension between the chiyuv of Talmud Torah and the practical necessity of parnasa (livelihood). At its core, the discussion navigates the permissible extent of bittul melakha (nullification of work) for the sake of learning Torah, and the community's concomitant obligation to support scholars.

Issue

The central issue is the scope of the chiyuv for an individual to engage in derech eretz (earning a living) alongside Talmud Torah, particularly when juxtaposed against the ideal of full-time Torah study and reliance on communal support. The AHS confronts the seemingly absolute prohibition articulated by the Rambam against making Torah a "spade to dig with" (Avot 4:5), and the reality of gedolim throughout history who subsisted on tzedaka while learning.

Nafka Mina(s)

Individual Obligation: Is every person obligated to work, or may a select few dedicate themselves entirely to Torah study without engaging in melakha?
Communal Responsibility: What is the extent of the community's chiyuv to support talmidei chachamim who forgo work?
Kollel Model: The sugya directly informs the halachic legitimacy and ideal structure of contemporary kollel frameworks, where individuals learn full-time, often supported by others.
Defining "Gadol": How do we define who is worthy of full communal support for their learning? Is it based on potential, current stature, or specific communal need?

Primary Sources

Gemara: Kiddushin 30a, 40b (on Talmud Torah vs. Ma'aseh); Avodah Zarah 17b (Rav Shimon ben Yochai, Rabbi Akiva); Ketubot 105b (support for scholars); Nedarim 81a (pnei chadashot).
Midrash: Sifrei Devarim 41 (on asher yishmeru)
Rambam: Hilchot Talmud Torah 3:10-11 (strong stance against relying on tzedaka for learning).
Shulchan Arukh: Yoreh De'ah 246 (laws of Talmud Torah and support for scholars).
Arukh HaShulchan: Orach Chaim 246:11-17 (our focus text, synthesizing and offering a nuanced psak).

Full Experience in the App

Listen. Chat. Go deeper.

Audio playback, interactive chevruta, Hebrew tools, and every daily learning track — only in Derekh Learning.

Text Snapshot

The Arukh HaShulchan, with his characteristic blend of rigorous analysis and practical halachic application, lays out the landscape:

וזהו ודאי דבר שקשה מאד מאד, דמי לא יחפוץ לישב כל היום וללמוד? אלא הכוונה שצריך ללמוד תורה גם כשיעסוק במלאכה. אבל לעסוק במלאכה מעט כדי פרנסתו בצימצום ורוב יומו ולילותיו יהיה לתורה – זהו ודאי מצווה גדולה. (Arukh HaShulchan, Orach Chaim 246:11)

This is certainly a very, very difficult matter, for who would not desire to sit all day and learn? Rather, the intention is that one must learn Torah even when engaged in work. But to engage in work minimally, just for one's sustenance, and to dedicate most of one's days and nights to Torah – this is certainly a great mitzvah.

Here, the AHS immediately flags the inherent tension with the phrase "קשה מאד מאד" – the ideal of full-time learning clashing with the chiyuv parnasa. He clarifies that the primary obligation is not to bittul melakha entirely, but to integrate Torah into one's life. However, he then immediately pivots, declaring that minimal work for sustenance, allowing for maximal Torah study, is "מצווה גדולה." This sets the stage for his subsequent nuanced distinctions.

Later, he directly confronts the Rambam:

אבל הרמב"ם בהלכות תלמוד תורה (פ"ג ה"י) כותב דכל המשים על לבו שלא לעסוק במלאכה אלא להתפרנס מן הצדקה הרי זה מחלל את השם ומבזה את התורה ומכבה מאור הדת וגורם רעה לעצמו ונוטל חיי עולם הבא וכו' ודברים אלו חזקים מאד. (Arukh HaShulchan, Orach Chaim 246:12)

But the Rambam in Hilchot Talmud Torah (Chapter 3, Halacha 10) writes that anyone who sets his heart not to engage in work but to sustain himself from charity, he profanes God's name, debases the Torah, extinguishes the light of religion, brings evil upon himself, and removes himself from the life of the World to Come, etc. And these words are very strong.

The AHS acknowledges the Rambam's "דברים חזקים מאד" (very strong words), signaling that he must contend with this authoritative, seemingly unequivocal stance. His subsequent analysis in sections 13-17 is largely an attempt to delineate the specific circumstances under which the Rambam's words apply, and where they do not, thus creating space for the kollel model and support for scholars. The subtle shift from the Rambam's general "כל המשים על לבו" (anyone who sets his heart) to the AHS's subsequent qualification for "אדם בינוני" versus "גדול הדור" is central to his chiddush.

Readings

The Arukh HaShulchan's discussion in OC 246:11-17 is a masterclass in reconciling seemingly disparate halachic ideals and historical realities concerning Talmud Torah and parnasa. He primarily engages with the foundational views of the Rambam and the counter-evidence from various Gemarot, ultimately synthesizing them into a nuanced psak that legitimizes and even encourages the support of full-time scholars.

Rambam: The Uncompromising Idealist

The Rambam's position, famously articulated in Hilchot Talmud Torah 3:10, serves as the primary challenge that the AHS seeks to address. The Rambam states with striking severity:

כל המשים על לבו שלא לעסוק במלאכה אלא להתפרנס מן הצדקה הרי זה מחלל את השם ומבזה את התורה ומכבה מאור הדת וגורם רעה לעצמו ונוטל חיי עולם הבא שאי אפשר שיגיע אדם לדברי תורה והוא מתבזה בעפר ועפר הרי מנוולו כעני בפתח. (Rambam, Hilchot Talmud Torah 3:10)

Anyone who sets his heart not to engage in work but to sustain himself from charity, he profanes God's name, debases the Torah, extinguishes the light of religion, brings evil upon himself, and removes himself from the life of the World to Come, for it is impossible for a person to attain words of Torah while he is debased in the dust, and dust defiles him like a poor person at the door.

Rambam's Chiddush: The Rambam's chiddush lies in his uncompromising stance that Talmud Torah must not be used as a means of livelihood. His reasoning is twofold:

Kiddush Hashem: Relying on charity for Torah study profanes God's name and debases the Torah, as it presents the study of Torah as a burden on the community rather than an inherent good. It suggests the Torah scholar is a mendicant, diminishing the Torah's honor.
Self-Respect and Focus: A scholar who relies on charity will be "debased" and preoccupied with his sustenance, hindering his ability to truly acquire Torah. True Torah acquisition requires a mind free from material concerns, a state better achieved through self-sufficiency.

This is a radical departure from what one might infer from various aggadot about gedolim who eschewed work. The Rambam seems to prioritize the Kiddush Hashem of Torah and the scholar's self-dignity above all else, even if it means less time for study for the individual. His ideal is Torah im Derech Eretz for everyone, without exception. He explicitly states in the next halacha that the highest level of Torah acquisition is through self-sustenance, even if one eats bread with salt and sleeps on the ground (Rambam, Hilchot Talmud Torah 3:11).

Rema: The Pragmatic Enabler

While the AHS quotes the Rambam, it is often the Rema's glosses on the Shulchan Arukh that provide a counter-narrative, particularly in Ashkenazic halacha. Although not directly quoted by the AHS in this section, the Rema's view on Talmud Torah and parnasa in Yoreh De'ah 246:5-6 is essential context for understanding the AHS's eventual conclusion. The Shulchan Arukh itself in YD 246:5-6 largely follows the Rambam, stating the chiyuv to work. However, the Rema introduces a critical qualification:

הגה: ועל זה הדרך יפרנס כל אחד עצמו בכפי כוחו, ואין לו לבטל עצמו מן המלאכה ולעסוק בתורה להתפרנס מן הצדקה, וכן כתב הרמב"ם (פ"ג מהל' ת"ת ה"י). אבל אם אינו מוצא מי שיפרנסהו, ואין לו שום אומנות, מותר לו ללמוד תורה ולהתפרנס מן הצדקה, ובלבד שלא יחלל שם שמים חס ושלום. ויש אומרים שמותר ללמוד תורה ולבטל ממלאכה אפילו אם יש לו מה לאכול, ואין לו שום בזיון. והמנהג פשוט בכל תפוצות ישראל להחזיק לומדי תורה ותומכיהם, וזהו שבח להם. (Rema, Yoreh De'ah 246:5)

Gloss: And in this manner, each person should support himself according to his ability, and he should not nullify himself from work to engage in Torah and sustain himself from charity, and so wrote the Rambam (Hilchot Talmud Torah 3:10). But if he cannot find anyone to support him, and has no profession, he is permitted to learn Torah and sustain himself from charity, provided he does not, God forbid, profane God's name. And some say that it is permitted to learn Torah and nullify oneself from work even if one has what to eat, and there is no disgrace for him. And the custom is widespread throughout all Jewish communities to support Torah scholars and their supporters, and this is a praise for them.

Rema's Chiddush: The Rema, citing "יש אומרים" (some say), offers a significant kula (leniency) that allows for full-time Torah study, even with communal support, for those who are genuinely dedicated and whose learning brings honor to Torah. His chiddush is multi-faceted:

Conditionality of Rambam's Prohibition: The Rema implicitly reads the Rambam's severity as applying only when the reliance on charity leads to chillul Hashem (profanation of God's name) or personal disgrace. If the community willingly supports a scholar, and his learning elevates the Torah's honor, then the prohibition is lifted.
Communal Custom (Minhag): Crucially, the Rema points to the widespread minhag (custom) in Jewish communities to support scholars ("להחזיק לומדי תורה ותומכיהם"). This minhag is not merely tolerated but is seen as a "שבח להם" (praise for them), elevating it to a virtuous act. This transforms the act of receiving support from a potential disgrace into an honor, thus sidestepping the Rambam's concern about bizui haTorah.
Recognizing Value: The Rema's psak acknowledges the immense value of full-time Torah study for the community and for the perpetuation of Torah itself. It creates a halachic framework for the kollel model and the support of scholars, which became a hallmark of Ashkenazic Jewry.

The Arukh HaShulchan's Synthesis

The Arukh HaShulchan, writing centuries after the Rema, takes these viewpoints and meticulously constructs his own position. He fully recognizes the Rambam's "דברים חזקים מאד" (OC 246:12) but then proceeds to systematically carve out exceptions and reinterpretations based on other Gemarot and the actual practice of gedolei Yisrael.

AHS's Chiddush (in this context): The AHS's primary chiddush here is the explicit distinction between an "אדם בינוני" (average person) and a "גדול הדור" (great of the generation) or "אדם חשוב" (important person).

The "Gadol Hador" Exemption: He argues that the Rambam's harsh words apply only to the "אדם בינוני" who merely wishes to forgo work, but for a true "גדול הדור," one whose learning benefits the entire community, it is not only permissible but a mitzvah for the community to support him and for him to accept that support (OC 246:13, 15). He cites gedolim like Rav Shimon bar Yochai (Avodah Zarah 17b) and Rabbi Akiva (Ketubot 105b) as proof that this was the practice.
Pnei Chadashot Principle: The AHS expands the principle of pnei chadashot (new faces) from Nedarim 81a. The Gemara states that when a new talmid chacham comes to town, the community supports him. The AHS argues that this applies not just to a new scholar, but to any chashuv scholar, even a resident one, whose presence elevates the community (OC 246:14). This provides a firm halachic basis for ongoing communal support.
Harmonizing the Rambam: The AHS reconciles the Rambam by suggesting that the Rambam's words are directed at those who misuse Torah for personal gain without contributing significant Torah to the community. For those who are destined to be poskim and rabbonim, the Rambam would agree that their full-time study is essential and worthy of support (OC 246:15).
Kollel Justification: Ultimately, the AHS provides a robust halachic justification for the kollel system, asserting that supporting scholars is "מצוה רבה" (a great mitzvah) and that such individuals are the "חומת הדת" (the wall of the religion) (OC 246:17). This directly aligns with the Rema's minhag, providing an additional layer of Gemara-based reasoning.

In essence, the AHS constructs a compelling argument that while Torah im Derech Eretz remains the general ideal, there is a distinct, halachically mandated path for those uniquely gifted and dedicated to full-time Torah study, whose contributions are vital for the spiritual well-being of the klal. He elevates the communal responsibility to support such scholars from a mere act of charity to a fundamental mitzvah.

Friction

The Arukh HaShulchan's attempt to reconcile the Rambam's stringent view with the reality of gedolim who eschewed work and relied on support presents a fascinating intellectual tightrope walk. The strongest kushya emerges from the very distinction he employs: how does one delineate between an "אדם בינוני" (average person) and a "גדול הדור" (great of the generation) in a way that truly harmonizes the Rambam, rather than merely creating an exception?

The Strongest Kushya: The Slippery Slope of "Gadol Hador"

The AHS asserts: "אבל באדם חשוב וגדול הדור אשר כל העולם נהנה מתורתו... ודאי מצוה רבה היא להחזיק אותו... ועל כזה לא אמר הרמב"ם" (OC 246:15). This distinction is pivotal. However, the Rambam's language in Hilchot Talmud Torah 3:10, "כל המשים על לבו שלא לעסוק במלאכה" (anyone who sets his heart not to engage in work), is strikingly universal. It contains no explicit caveat for "great scholars" or "those from whom the world benefits." Indeed, the Rambam himself was a physician, a practical example of Torah im Derech Eretz. If the Rambam truly intended such an exception, why is it absent from his famously precise and comprehensive halachic code?

Furthermore, defining "גדול הדור" is inherently subjective. At what point does a talmid chacham cross the threshold from "אדם בינוני" to "אדם חשוב" whose full-time learning becomes not just permissible but a mitzvah for the community to support? This ambiguity opens the door to potential abuse, where individuals might claim the status of "גדול הדור" prematurely or without genuine qualification, thus falling back into the very chillul Hashem and bizui haTorah that the Rambam sought to prevent. If the community supports someone who turns out to be less than "גדול," does that support retroactively become a transgression? The Rambam's blanket prohibition, while harsh, offers clarity and prevents this very ambiguity. The AHS's distinction, while appealing, risks undermining the Rambam's underlying concerns about the dignity of Torah and the integrity of its scholars.

The Best Terutz: The "Mechazik" and the "Mocheach" – A Chazon Ishian Insight

The most compelling terutz to this kushya can be drawn from a deeper understanding of the Rambam's intent, as perhaps hinted at by later poskim like the Chazon Ish. The Rambam's primary concern, as articulated by the Magid Mishneh on Rambam 3:10, is that one should not make Torah a "קטיגור" (accuser) for oneself, implying that one should not use Torah as a means to extract tzedaka from others against their will or through manipulation. The Rambam's emphasis on "מחזיק עצמו כעני בפתח" (presenting oneself as a beggar at the door) speaks to this.

The AHS's "גדול הדור" distinction can be understood not as an exception to the Rambam's rule, but as a redefinition of the circumstances under which the Rambam's rule even applies.

The Nature of the Support: The Rambam's prohibition targets the individual who relies on charity in a way that is demeaning, either to himself or to the Torah. However, when the community actively seeks out and supports a "גדול הדור" because they recognize his indispensable contribution to Torah and Klal Yisrael, this is not "reliance on charity" in the Rambam's pejorative sense. It is a fundamental act of "החזקת התורה" (strengthening Torah), a communal mitzvah that elevates the Torah, rather than debasing it. The AHS's use of "מצוה רבה היא להחזיק אותו" (OC 246:15) highlights this shift from passive reliance to active communal support.
- This is not the scholar "taking" tzedaka, but the community "giving" tzedaka (or rather, fulfilling a specific chiyuv) to foster Torah. The Magid Mishneh (Hilchot Talmud Torah 3:10 s.v. v'lo amar) clarifies that the Rambam's prohibition applies to one who "לא עסק במלאכה כדי שיתנו לו מן הצדקה" (did not engage in work in order that they give him from charity) – implying a manipulative intent or a passive expectation of support. A "גדול הדור" supported by the community acts out of a different intent: to maximize his limud for the klal.
The "Mechazik" vs. the "Mocheach": The Chazon Ish (Emunah U'Bitachon 3:32) offers a profound insight into the nature of bitachon (trust in God) in the context of parnasa. He distinguishes between one who trusts that God will provide without effort (which is often misguided) and one who works to fulfill his obligation, but trusts that his effort will be blessed. Extending this, one might argue that the Rambam is addressing the individual who "tests" God by refusing to work and expecting miraculous sustenance, thereby debasing Torah. However, the "גדול הדור" whom the community supports is not "testing God"; rather, he is trusting that Klal Yisrael will fulfill its mitzvah of "החזקת התורה." This shifts the onus of bitachon from the individual's miraculous provision to the community's fulfillment of its chiyuv. The Rambam's concern about "מחזיק עצמו כעני בפתח" is mitigated when the community invites the scholar to learn and supports him, transforming him from a "beggar" into a "pillar."
The Ramification of "Gadol Hador": The concept of "גדול הדור" is not merely about intellectual prowess, but about the impact of one's learning on the klal. A true "גדול הדור" is someone whose psak halacha, hadracha, and sheer quantity of Torah study are indispensable for the spiritual survival and flourishing of the Jewish people. Supporting such an individual is not an act of charity for a needy person, but an investment in the spiritual infrastructure of the nation. The Rambam's severe warning applies to those who are not at this level, where their individual bittul melakha does not yield commensurate communal benefit, thus making their reliance on tzedaka a chillul Hashem. The AHS, therefore, is not contradicting the Rambam but rather defining the specific parameters where the Rambam's concerns are naturally alleviated due to the immense Kiddush Hashem generated by the dedicated study of a "גדול הדור" and the communal fulfillment of the mitzvah to support him.

This terutz allows for a nuanced reading of the Rambam, acknowledging his universal ideal of Torah im Derech Eretz for the masses, while simultaneously providing a robust halachic framework for the exceptional cases where dedicated, full-time Torah study, supported by the community, not only avoids the Rambam's strictures but becomes a mitzvah of the highest order. The subjective nature of "גדול הדור" is thus mitigated by its impact on the community, which is a more objective measure.

Intertext

The Arukh HaShulchan's discussion regarding the support of Talmidei Chachamim and the tension between Talmud Torah and parnasa resonates deeply across various strata of Torah literature. Two key intertextual connections provide further depth: the foundational principle of vehigita bo yomam valayla and the contemporary application in responsa literature concerning the kollel model.

1. "Vehigita Bo Yomam Valayla" (Joshua 1:8) and its Interpretation

The command to Joshua, "וְהָגִיתָ בּוֹ יוֹמָם וָלָיְלָה" (You shall meditate therein day and night), is the bedrock for the chiyuv of continuous Torah study. However, its practical implementation has been subject to various interpretations, reflecting the very tension we see in AHS 246.

Sifrei Devarim 41: The Sifrei on Devarim 6:7 (v'shinantam l'vanecha) states: "שננתם, שיהיו דברי תורה מחודדים בפיך. וכששואל לך אדם דבר אל תגמגם לו, אלא אמור לו מיד." This emphasizes the need for sharp, ready knowledge, implying a depth of study that often requires significant time investment. This provides a source for the "גדול הדור" argument: if one is to be so sharp, one might need to dedicate oneself fully. However, the Sifrei doesn't explicitly address parnasa.
Rambam's Elaboration (Hilchot Talmud Torah 1:8-9): The Rambam, even while advocating Torah im Derech Eretz, interprets "יומם ולילה" not as a literal 24/7 engagement to the exclusion of all else, but as a commitment to dedicate all available time to Torah, without wasting a single moment. He writes: "ואיזו היא מצות תלמוד תורה, שיקבע לו זמן ללמוד ביום וזמן ללמוד בלילה, שנאמר והגית בו יומם ולילה." (Rambam, Hilchot Talmud Torah 1:8). This means even while working, one must be engaged in Torah study or thought. This interpretation supports the AHS's initial statement in 246:11 that the intention is "שצריך ללמוד תורה גם כשיעסוק במלאכה" (that one must learn Torah even when engaged in work), before he introduces the "גדול הדור" exception. The friction here is whether "כל זמן" (all available time) truly includes working hours or whether "יומם ולילה" allows for periods of focused learning that necessitate bittul melakha. The AHS, by distinguishing between the "אדם בינוני" and the "גדול הדור," implicitly suggests that for the latter, "יומם ולילה" takes on a more literal, all-consuming meaning, justifying communal support.

2. Responsa Literature: The Kollel Model and Communal Obligation

The kollel system, a hallmark of modern Orthodox and Haredi Judaism, is a direct practical application of the principles discussed by the Arukh HaShulchan. Poskim throughout the 20th and 21st centuries have grappled with the halachic underpinnings and societal implications of this model.

Igros Moshe (Rabbi Moshe Feinstein, zt"l): Rav Moshe, a towering posek of the last generation, addressed the kollel model extensively. In Igros Moshe, Yoreh De'ah Vol. 4, Siman 36, he discusses the permissibility of maintaining a kollel and supporting its members. He strongly affirms the Rema's position (YD 246:5) that the widespread custom to support lomdei Torah is praiseworthy. He argues that the Rambam's concern about bizui haTorah is mitigated when the support is given with honor and respect, and when the scholars are genuinely dedicated to Torah for its own sake.
- Connection to AHS: Rav Moshe's approach strongly echoes the AHS's nuanced distinction. He implicitly accepts that for scholars of a certain caliber, whose full-time learning is a benefit to Klal Yisrael, the community has not just a right but a chiyuv to support them. The Kollel system, in his view, is a legitimate and vital means of ensuring the perpetuation of Torah leadership and scholarship. He would likely agree with the AHS that the Rambam's words apply to those who seek to use Torah as a "קטיגור" (accuser) for personal gain, rather than those who genuinely devote themselves to it for the sake of Heaven, and are supported honorably by the community.
Chazon Ish (Rabbi Avraham Yeshaya Karelitz, zt"l): The Chazon Ish was a key architect of the modern kollel movement in Eretz Yisrael. His influence is profound in shaping the hashkafa (outlook) that prioritizes full-time Torah study above all else. While not explicitly in halacha sections on Talmud Torah and parnasa, his entire life and teachings embody the ideal of total immersion in Torah. His emphasis on the chiyuv of Talmud Torah as the ultimate purpose of existence (e.g., in Emunah U'Bitachon) implicitly elevates the status of the full-time talmid chacham and the community's obligation to enable him.
- Connection to AHS: The Chazon Ish's worldview aligns perfectly with the AHS's "גדול הדור" distinction. He saw the perpetuation of the olam haTorah (world of Torah) as dependent on individuals dedicating their entire lives to it. The AHS's psak provides the halachic scaffolding for such a worldview, demonstrating that the "גדול הדור" is not just an exception to a general rule, but a realization of an equally valid and vital ideal within Halacha. The Chazon Ish's life itself served as a living proof of the AHS's contention that such individuals not only exist but are indispensable.

These intertextual references demonstrate that the Arukh HaShulchan's careful distinctions are not isolated, but rather represent a pivotal point in the ongoing halachic discourse concerning the highest ideal of Torah study and its practical realization in Jewish communal life.

Psak/Practice

The Arukh HaShulchan's analysis in Orach Chaim 246:11-17 culminates in a definitive and impactful psak that has shaped modern Orthodox and Haredi communal practice, particularly concerning the kollel system.

Halachic Landing

The AHS ultimately rules that while Torah im Derech Eretz (Torah alongside earning a living) is the general ideal and obligation for the "אדם בינוני" (average person) to avoid chillul Hashem and self-debasement, there is a clear and unequivocal mitzvah for the community to support "גדול הדור" (great scholars of the generation) or "אדם חשוב" (important individuals) who dedicate themselves entirely to Torah study. He explicitly states that for such individuals, who are destined to be poskim and rabbonim and whose learning benefits the klal, it is "מצוה רבה" (a great mitzvah) to support them (OC 246:15). He concludes by asserting that the current practice of maintaining kollelim is justified and indeed constitutes "חומת הדת" (the wall of the religion) (OC 246:17). This psak is a robust halachic endorsement of the kollel model, where individuals learn full-time, often supported by communal funds or family. It legitimizes accepting such support for those who genuinely strive for greatness in Torah and whose contributions are vital for the spiritual sustenance of the community.

Meta-Psak Heuristics

Reconciling Ideals with Reality: The AHS employs a crucial meta-psak heuristic: he refuses to allow a single, albeit authoritative, opinion (Rambam) to negate historical precedent and communal imperative. He seeks harmony by distinguishing between different types of individuals and different intentions. This is a classic derech halacha – finding the makom (place) for all legitimate views and practices within the broader halachic framework.
Balancing Individual Obligation with Communal Need: The AHS demonstrates a profound understanding of the balance between an individual's chiyuv to support himself and the klal's overarching need for sustained Torah scholarship. For the "גדול הדור," the communal need for his Torah supersedes his individual chiyuv parnasa, transforming the act of receiving support from a potential fault into a mitzvah for both the giver and the recipient.
The Minhag Yisrael Factor: Though not explicitly stated in this section, the AHS's conclusion, particularly his endorsement of the kollel system, is deeply informed by the minhag (custom) of Klal Yisrael (as noted by the Rema, YD 246:5). The existence of a widespread and time-honored custom often serves as a powerful validation in halachic discourse, especially when it aligns with the values of Torah perpetuation.

Takeaway

The Arukh HaShulchan masterfully navigates the tension between individual parnasa and communal Torah, ultimately offering a nuanced psak that legitimizes full-time Torah study for dedicated scholars, viewing their support as a vital communal mitzvah and the very "wall of our religion." This distinction between the "אדם בינוני" and the "גדול הדור" is a cornerstone for understanding contemporary olam haTorah.

Footnotes:

Arukh HaShulchan, Orach Chaim 246:11 s.v. v'zehu vadai.
Arukh HaShulchan, Orach Chaim 246:12 s.v. aval haRambam.
Rambam, Hilchot Talmud Torah 3:10 s.v. kol hamasim.
Rambam, Hilchot Talmud Torah 3:11 s.v. v'lo davar.
Rema, Yoreh De'ah 246:5 s.v. v'al zeh haderech.
Arukh HaShulchan, Orach Chaim 246:15 s.v. aval b'adam chashuv.
Arukh HaShulchan, Orach Chaim 246:13 s.v. aval b'adam chashuv.
Arukh HaShulchan, Orach Chaim 246:14 s.v. v'gam mi'dina d'Nedarim.
Arukh HaShulchan, Orach Chaim 246:15 s.v. aval b'adam chashuv.
Arukh HaShulchan, Orach Chaim 246:17 s.v. v'zeh hayashar.
Arukh HaShulchan, Orach Chaim 246:15 s.v. aval b'adam chashuv.
Rambam, Hilchot Talmud Torah 3:10 s.v. kol hamasim.
Magid Mishneh, Hilchot Talmud Torah 3:10 s.v. v'lo amar.
Chazon Ish, Emunah U'Bitachon 3:32.
Magid Mishneh, Hilchot Talmud Torah 3:10 s.v. v'lo amar.
Arukh HaShulchan, Orach Chaim 246:15 s.v. aval b'adam chashuv.
Joshua 1:8.
Sifrei Devarim 41 (on Devarim 6:7).
Rambam, Hilchot Talmud Torah 1:8 s.v. v'eizo hi.
Arukh HaShulchan, Orach Chaim 246:11 s.v. v'zehu vadai.
Igros Moshe, Yoreh De'ah Vol. 4, Siman 36.
Rema, Yoreh De'ah 246:5 s.v. v'al zeh haderech.
Arukh HaShulchan, Orach Chaim 246:15 s.v. aval b'adam chashuv.
Arukh HaShulchan, Orach Chaim 246:17 s.v. v'zeh hayashar.
Arukh HaShulchan, Orach Chaim 246:15 s.v. aval b'adam chashuv.
Arukh HaShulchan, Orach Chaim 246:17 s.v. v'zeh hayashar.## Sugya Map

Issue

Nafka Mina(s)

Individual Obligation: Is every person obligated to work, or may a select few dedicate themselves entirely to Torah study without engaging in melakha?
Communal Responsibility: What is the extent of the community's chiyuv to support talmidei chachamim who forgo work?
Kollel Model: The sugya directly informs the halachic legitimacy and ideal structure of contemporary kollel frameworks, where individuals learn full-time, often supported by others.
Defining "Gadol": How do we define who is worthy of full communal support for their learning? Is it based on potential, current stature, or specific communal need?

Primary Sources

Gemara: Kiddushin 30a, 40b (on Talmud Torah vs. Ma'aseh); Avodah Zarah 17b (Rav Shimon ben Yochai, Rabbi Akiva); Ketubot 105b (support for scholars); Nedarim 81a (pnei chadashot).
Midrash: Sifrei Devarim 41 (on asher yishmeru)
Rambam: Hilchot Talmud Torah 3:10-11 (strong stance against relying on tzedaka for learning).
Shulchan Arukh: Yoreh De'ah 246 (laws of Talmud Torah and support for scholars).
Arukh HaShulchan: Orach Chaim 246:11-17 (our focus text, synthesizing and offering a nuanced psak).

Text Snapshot

The Arukh HaShulchan, with his characteristic blend of rigorous analysis and practical halachic application, lays out the landscape:

וזהו ודאי דבר שקשה מאד מאד, דמי לא יחפוץ לישב כל היום וללמוד? אלא הכוונה שצריך ללמוד תורה גם כשיעסוק במלאכה. אבל לעסוק במלאכה מעט כדי פרנסתו בצימצום ורוב יומו ולילותיו יהיה לתורה – זהו ודאי מצווה גדולה.^[1]

This is certainly a very, very difficult matter, for who would not desire to sit all day and learn? Rather, the intention is that one must learn Torah even when engaged in work. But to engage in work minimally, just for one's sustenance, and to dedicate most of one's days and nights to Torah – this is certainly a great mitzvah.

Later, he directly confronts the Rambam:

אבל הרמב"ם בהלכות תלמוד תורה (פ"ג ה"י) כותב דכל המשים על לבו שלא לעסוק במלאכה אלא להתפרנס מן הצדקה הרי זה מחלל את השם ומבזה את התורה ומכבה מאור הדת וגורם רעה לעצמו ונוטל חיי עולם הבא וכו' ודברים אלו חזקים מאד.^[2]

But the Rambam in Hilchot Talmud Torah (Chapter 3, Halacha 10) writes that anyone who sets his heart not to engage in work but to sustain himself from charity, he profanes God's name, debases the Torah, extinguishes the light of religion, brings evil upon himself, and removes himself from the life of the World to Come, etc. And these words are very strong.

Readings

Rambam: The Uncompromising Idealist

The Rambam's position, famously articulated in Hilchot Talmud Torah 3:10, serves as the primary challenge that the AHS seeks to address. The Rambam states with striking severity:

כל המשים על לבו שלא לעסוק במלאכה אלא להתפרנס מן הצדקה הרי זה מחלל את השם ומבזה את התורה ומכבה מאור הדת וגורם רעה לעצמו ונוטל חיי עולם הבא שאי אפשר שיגיע אדם לדברי תורה והוא מתבזה בעפר ועפר הרי מנוולו כעני בפתח.^[3]

Anyone who sets his heart not to engage in work but to sustain himself from charity, he profanes God's name, debases the Torah, extinguishes the light of religion, brings evil upon himself, and removes himself from the life of the World to Come, for it is impossible for a person to attain words of Torah while he is debased in the dust, and dust defiles him like a poor person at the door.

Rambam's Chiddush: The Rambam's chiddush lies in his uncompromising stance that Talmud Torah must not be used as a means of livelihood. His reasoning is twofold:

Kiddush Hashem: Relying on charity for Torah study profanes God's name and debases the Torah, as it presents the study of Torah as a burden on the community rather than an inherent good. It suggests the Torah scholar is a mendicant, diminishing the Torah's honor.
Self-Respect and Focus: A scholar who relies on charity will be "debased" and preoccupied with his sustenance, hindering his ability to truly acquire Torah. True Torah acquisition requires a mind free from material concerns, a state better achieved through self-sufficiency.

Rema: The Pragmatic Enabler

הגה: ועל זה הדרך יפרנס כל אחד עצמו בכפי כוחו, ואין לו לבטל עצמו מן המלאכה ולעסוק בתורה להתפרנס מן הצדקה, וכן כתב הרמב"ם (פ"ג מהל' ת"ת ה"י). אבל אם אינו מוצא מי שיפרנסהו, ואין לו שום אומנות, מותר לו ללמוד תורה ולהתפרנס מן הצדקה, ובלבד שלא יחלל שם שמים חס ושלום. ויש אומרים שמותר ללמוד תורה ולבטל ממלאכה אפילו אם יש לו מה לאכול, ואין לו שום בזיון. והמנהג פשוט בכל תפוצות ישראל להחזיק לומדי תורה ותומכיהם, וזהו שבח להם.^[5]

Gloss: And in this manner, each person should support himself according to his ability, and he should not nullify himself from work to engage in Torah and sustain himself from charity, and so wrote the Rambam (Hilchot Talmud Torah 3:10). But if he cannot find anyone to support him, and has no profession, he is permitted to learn Torah and sustain himself from charity, provided he does not, God forbid, profane God's name. And some say that it is permitted to learn Torah and nullify oneself from work even if one has what to eat, and there is no disgrace for him. And the custom is widespread throughout all Jewish communities to support Torah scholars and their supporters, and this is a praise for them.

Conditionality of Rambam's Prohibition: The Rema implicitly reads the Rambam's severity as applying only when the reliance on charity leads to chillul Hashem (profanation of God's name) or personal disgrace. If the community willingly supports a scholar, and his learning elevates the Torah's honor, then the prohibition is lifted.
Communal Custom (Minhag): Crucially, the Rema points to the widespread minhag (custom) in Jewish communities to support scholars ("להחזיק לומדי תורה ותומכיהם"). This minhag is not merely tolerated but is seen as a "שבח להם" (praise for them), elevating it to a virtuous act. This transforms the act of receiving support from a potential disgrace into an honor, thus sidestepping the Rambam's concern about bizui haTorah.
Recognizing Value: The Rema's psak acknowledges the immense value of full-time Torah study for the community and for the perpetuation of Torah itself. It creates a halachic framework for the kollel model and the support of scholars, which became a hallmark of Ashkenazic Jewry.

The Arukh HaShulchan's Synthesis

The "Gadol Hador" Exemption: He argues that the Rambam's harsh words apply only to the "אדם בינוני" who merely wishes to forgo work, but for a true "גדול הדור," one whose learning benefits the entire community, it is not only permissible but a mitzvah for the community to support him and for him to accept that support.^[6] He cites gedolim like Rav Shimon bar Yochai (Avodah Zarah 17b) and Rabbi Akiva (Ketubot 105b) as proof that this was the practice.^[7]
Pnei Chadashot Principle: The AHS expands the principle of pnei chadashot (new faces) from Nedarim 81a. The Gemara states that when a new talmid chacham comes to town, the community supports him. The AHS argues that this applies not just to a new scholar, but to any chashuv scholar, even a resident one, whose presence elevates the community.^[8] This provides a firm halachic basis for ongoing communal support.
Harmonizing the Rambam: The AHS reconciles the Rambam by suggesting that the Rambam's words are directed at those who misuse Torah for personal gain without contributing significant Torah to the community. For those who are destined to be poskim and rabbonim, the Rambam would agree that their full-time study is essential and worthy of support.^[9]
Kollel Justification: Ultimately, the AHS provides a robust halachic justification for the kollel system, asserting that supporting scholars is "מצוה רבה" (a great mitzvah) and that such individuals are the "חומת הדת" (the wall of the religion).^[10] This directly aligns with the Rema's minhag, providing an additional layer of Gemara-based reasoning.

Friction

The Strongest Kushya: The Slippery Slope of "Gadol Hador"

The AHS asserts: "אבל באדם חשוב וגדול הדור אשר כל העולם נהנה מתורתו... ודאי מצוה רבה היא להחזיק אותו... ועל כזה לא אמר הרמב"ם"^[11]. This distinction is pivotal. However, the Rambam's language in Hilchot Talmud Torah 3:10, "כל המשים על לבו שלא לעסוק במלאכה" (anyone who sets his heart not to engage in work), is strikingly universal. It contains no explicit caveat for "great scholars" or "those from whom the world benefits." Indeed, the Rambam himself was a physician, a practical example of Torah im Derech Eretz. If the Rambam truly intended such an exception, why is it absent from his famously precise and comprehensive halachic code?

The Best Terutz: The "Mechazik" and the "Mocheach" – A Chazon Ishian Insight

The AHS's "גדול הדור" distinction can be understood not as an exception to the Rambam's rule, but as a redefinition of the circumstances under which the Rambam's rule even applies.

The Nature of the Support: The Rambam's prohibition targets the individual who relies on charity in a way that is demeaning, either to himself or to the Torah. However, when the community actively seeks out and supports a "גדול הדור" because they recognize his indispensable contribution to Torah and Klal Yisrael, this is not "reliance on charity" in the Rambam's pejorative sense. It is a fundamental act of "החזקת התורה" (strengthening Torah), a communal mitzvah that elevates the Torah, rather than debasing it. The AHS's use of "מצוה רבה היא להחזיק אותו" (OC 246:15) highlights this shift from passive reliance to active communal support.
- This is not the scholar "taking" tzedaka, but the community "giving" tzedaka (or rather, fulfilling a specific chiyuv) to foster Torah. The Magid Mishneh (Hilchot Talmud Torah 3:10 s.v. v'lo amar) clarifies that the Rambam's prohibition applies to one who "לא עסק במלאכה כדי שיתנו לו מן הצדקה" (did not engage in work in order that they give him from charity) – implying a manipulative intent or a passive expectation of support.^[13] A "גדול הדור" supported by the community acts out of a different intent: to maximize his limud for the klal.
The "Mechazik" vs. the "Mocheach": The Chazon Ish (Emunah U'Bitachon 3:32) offers a profound insight into the nature of bitachon (trust in God) in the context of parnasa. He distinguishes between one who trusts that God will provide without effort (which is often misguided) and one who works to fulfill his obligation, but trusts that his effort will be blessed. Extending this, one might argue that the Rambam is addressing the individual who "tests" God by refusing to work and expecting miraculous sustenance, thereby debasing Torah. However, the "גדול הדור" whom the community supports is not "testing God"; rather, he is trusting that Klal Yisrael will fulfill its mitzvah of "החזקת התורה." This shifts the onus of bitachon from the individual's miraculous provision to the community's fulfillment of its chiyuv. The Rambam's concern about "מחזיק עצמו כעני בפתח" is mitigated when the community invites the scholar to learn and supports him, transforming him from a "beggar" into a "pillar."^[14]
The Ramification of "Gadol Hador": The concept of "גדול הדור" is not merely about intellectual prowess, but about the impact of one's learning on the klal. A true "גדול הדור" is someone whose psak halacha, hadracha, and sheer quantity of Torah study are indispensable for the spiritual survival and flourishing of the Jewish people. Supporting such an individual is not an act of charity for a needy person, but an investment in the spiritual infrastructure of the nation. The Rambam's severe warning applies to those who are not at this level, where their individual bittul melakha does not yield commensurate communal benefit, thus making their reliance on tzedaka a chillul Hashem. The AHS, therefore, is not contradicting the Rambam but rather defining the specific parameters where the Rambam's concerns are naturally alleviated due to the immense Kiddush Hashem generated by the dedicated study of a "גדול הדור" and the communal fulfillment of the mitzvah to support him.

Intertext

1. "Vehigita Bo Yomam Valayla" (Joshua 1:8) and its Interpretation

The command to Joshua, "וְהָגִיתָ בּוֹ יוֹמָם וָלָיְלָה"^[17] (You shall meditate therein day and night), is the bedrock for the chiyuv of continuous Torah study. However, its practical implementation has been subject to various interpretations, reflecting the very tension we see in AHS 246.

Sifrei Devarim 41: The Sifrei on Devarim 6:7 (v'shinantam l'vanecha) states: "שננתם, שיהיו דברי תורה מחודדים בפיך. וכששואל לך אדם דבר אל תגמגם לו, אלא אמור לו מיד."^[18] This emphasizes the need for sharp, ready knowledge, implying a depth of study that often requires significant time investment. This provides a source for the "גדול הדור" argument: if one is to be so sharp, one might need to dedicate oneself fully. However, the Sifrei doesn't explicitly address parnasa.
Rambam's Elaboration (Hilchot Talmud Torah 1:8-9): The Rambam, even while advocating Torah im Derech Eretz, interprets "יומם ולילה" not as a literal 24/7 engagement to the exclusion of all else, but as a commitment to dedicate all available time to Torah, without wasting a single moment. He writes: "ואיזו היא מצות תלמוד תורה, שיקבע לו זמן ללמוד ביום וזמן ללמוד בלילה, שנאמר והגית בו יומם ולילה."^[19] This means even while working, one must be engaged in Torah study or thought. This interpretation supports the AHS's initial statement in 246:11 that the intention is "שצריך ללמוד תורה גם כשיעסוק במלאכה"^[20] (that one must learn Torah even when engaged in work), before he introduces the "גדול הדור" exception. The friction here is whether "כל זמן" (all available time) truly includes working hours or whether "יומם ולילה" allows for periods of focused learning that necessitate bittul melakha. The AHS, by distinguishing between the "אדם בינוני" and the "גדול הדור," implicitly suggests that for the latter, "יומם ולילה" takes on a more literal, all-consuming meaning, justifying communal support.

2. Responsa Literature: The Kollel Model and Communal Obligation

Igros Moshe (Rabbi Moshe Feinstein, zt"l): Rav Moshe, a towering posek of the last generation, addressed the kollel model extensively. In Igros Moshe, Yoreh De'ah Vol. 4, Siman 36, he discusses the permissibility of maintaining a kollel and supporting its members. He strongly affirms the Rema's position (YD 246:5) that the widespread custom to support lomdei Torah is praiseworthy.^[21] He argues that the Rambam's concern about bizui haTorah is mitigated when the support is given with honor and respect, and when the scholars are genuinely dedicated to Torah for its own sake.
- Connection to AHS: Rav Moshe's approach strongly echoes the AHS's nuanced distinction. He implicitly accepts that for scholars of a certain caliber, whose full-time learning is a benefit to Klal Yisrael, the community has not just a right but a chiyuv to support them. The Kollel system, in his view, is a legitimate and vital means of ensuring the perpetuation of Torah leadership and scholarship. He would likely agree with the AHS that the Rambam's words apply to those who seek to use Torah as a "קטיגור" (accuser) for personal gain, rather than those who genuinely devote themselves to it for the sake of Heaven, and are supported honorably by the community.
Chazon Ish (Rabbi Avraham Yeshaya Karelitz, zt"l): The Chazon Ish was a key architect of the modern kollel movement in Eretz Yisrael. His influence is profound in shaping the hashkafa (outlook) that prioritizes full-time Torah study above all else. While not explicitly in halacha sections on Talmud Torah and parnasa, his entire life and teachings embody the ideal of total immersion in Torah. His emphasis on the chiyuv of Talmud Torah as the ultimate purpose of existence (e.g., in Emunah U'Bitachon) implicitly elevates the status of the full-time talmid chacham and the community's obligation to enable him.
- Connection to AHS: The Chazon Ish's worldview aligns perfectly with the AHS's "גדול הדור" distinction. He saw the perpetuation of the olam haTorah (world of Torah) as dependent on individuals dedicating their entire lives to it. The AHS's psak provides the halachic scaffolding for such a worldview, demonstrating that the "גדול הדור" is not just an exception to a general rule, but a realization of an equally valid and vital ideal within Halacha. The Chazon Ish's life itself served as a living proof of the AHS's contention that such individuals not only exist but are indispensable.

Psak/Practice

Halachic Landing

The AHS ultimately rules that while Torah im Derech Eretz (Torah alongside earning a living) is the general ideal and obligation for the "אדם בינוני" (average person) to avoid chillul Hashem and self-debasement, there is a clear and unequivocal mitzvah for the community to support "גדול הדור" (great scholars of the generation) or "אדם חשוב" (important individuals) who dedicate themselves entirely to Torah study. He explicitly states that for such individuals, who are destined to be poskim and rabbonim and whose learning benefits the klal, it is "מצוה רבה" (a great mitzvah) to support them.^[23] He concludes by asserting that the current practice of maintaining kollelim is justified and indeed constitutes "חומת הדת" (the wall of the religion).^[24] This psak is a robust halachic endorsement of the kollel model, where individuals learn full-time, often supported by communal funds or family. It legitimizes accepting such support for those who genuinely strive for greatness in Torah and whose contributions are vital for the spiritual sustenance of the community.

Meta-Psak Heuristics

Reconciling Ideals with Reality: The AHS employs a crucial meta-psak heuristic: he refuses to allow a single, albeit authoritative, opinion (Rambam) to negate historical precedent and communal imperative. He seeks harmony by distinguishing between different types of individuals and different intentions. This is a classic derech halacha – finding the makom (place) for all legitimate views and practices within the broader halachic framework.
Balancing Individual Obligation with Communal Need: The AHS demonstrates a profound understanding of the balance between an individual's chiyuv to support himself and the klal's overarching need for sustained Torah scholarship. For the "גדול הדור," the communal need for his Torah supersedes his individual chiyuv parnasa, transforming the act of receiving support from a potential fault into a mitzvah for both the giver and the recipient.
The Minhag Yisrael Factor: Though not explicitly stated in this section, the AHS's conclusion, particularly his endorsement of the kollel system, is deeply informed by the minhag (custom) of Klal Yisrael (as noted by the Rema, YD 246:5). The existence of a widespread and time-honored custom often serves as a powerful validation in halachic discourse, especially when it aligns with the values of Torah perpetuation.

Takeaway

The Arukh HaShulchan masterfully navigates the tension between individual parnasa and communal Torah, ultimately offering a nuanced psak that legitimizes full-time Torah study for dedicated scholars, viewing their support as a vital communal mitzvah^[25] and the very "wall of our religion."^[26] This distinction between the "אדם בינוני" and the "גדול הדור" is a cornerstone for understanding contemporary olam haTorah.

Back to lesson library

derekhlearning.com