Taking Payment for Teaching the Quran
The scholars differed on the issue of payment for teaching the Quran. The matter can be divided into two categories.
The first category: hiring the reciter for recitation, not for teaching — as is done in some countries at times of condolence ('aza'), where a reciter is hired to recite for them. The preponderant view on this is prohibition. That the reciter recites the Quran at the time of condolence is forbidden because this action is an innovation (bid'a). Reciting the Quran at the time of condolence in this form is also an innovation. The Prophet ﷺ said: "Whoever introduces into this matter of ours something that is not from it, it is rejected." And this — the time of condolence — is not a time for Quran recitation. The payment taken for a bid'a is forbidden. The legal maxim states: any money received for something forbidden is forbidden.
The second category: hiring the reciter for teaching — a reciter who teaches and instructs — and this is also disputed.
The first view on the matter: some scholars considered it unconditionally disliked (makruh). There is a hadith on dislikeness and prohibition — such as the man who taught an Ansari companion the Quran and was given a bow, and the Prophet ﷺ said: "A bow of fire." But this report is defective. And the hadiths narrated on prohibition are questionable in their authenticity. Those who hold this view say: whenever the Quran is used as a business, teaching is curtailed and people become averse to learning, leading to harm.
The second view on the matter: unconditional permissibility — based on his ﷺ saying: "The most deserving thing for which you may take payment is the Book of Allah." Imam al-Bukhari (may Allah have mercy on him) narrated it in his Sahih. He says: this encompasses ruqya and encompasses the fee for teaching.
The third view on the matter: distinguishing between one who stipulates a fee and one who is given without stipulation, and between one who devotes himself to teaching and one who does not. So these scholars say: if given without request — voluntarily — or if given from the public treasury (bayt al-mal), this is permissible. But if he stipulates that he will not teach except for a fee — this will be disliked, [and among] those who go as far as declaring it forbidden.
The strongest view in this matter is that this is permissible, but it is preferable to teach for free — if teaching for free does not prevent him from his work and his full dedication — meaning: he is fully devoted. This money he uses to meet his needs — meaning: if he were not devoted, or if he were not paid, he could not be fully devoted, and if he cannot be fully devoted he cannot teach — not because he withholds teaching, but because he is occupied with the sources of his livelihood. So in such a case we say: taking payment is preferable for him. In such a case we say: taking payment is preferable for him, so that he may devote himself to teaching the children of Muslims the Quran, because the Quran is [the foundation of] the Muslims. This does not diminish his reward and merit — if his intention is such, and that he does not intend from the money a business, but rather intends it as a result of his devotion and so that he may continue teaching. The Prophet ﷺ said: "The best of you is the one who learns the Quran and teaches it."