Kri'at Shema - Chapter 2

Berachot 13b mentions several opinions concerning which sections of the Shema require intention. This is dependent on the discussion (see the notes to Halachah 2) regarding the extent of the obligation to read Shema required by the Torah. Rabbi Meir understands intention to be absolutely necessary only for the first verse and this opinion is accepted by the Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 60:5.

Concerning the first verse of Kri’at Shema, an extra level of concentration is required. In addition to the intent to carry out God’s command, the Shema must be read in fear and awe, trembling and trepidation. One accepts upon oneself the kingship of Heaven and proclaims the unity of God. It is unthinkable that at such a time, one would not focus his attention on the words he is uttering, but would rather think of mundane matters. (See Shulchan Aruch HaRav 60:5.) Each day one should imagine that he is reciting Shema Yisrael for the first time, and not as if he had heard it many times before (Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 61:1,2).
Kri’at Shema contains 248 words (245 of the three sections, plus the three extra words of Adonai Eloheichem Emet repeated upon completion of the third section). This corresponds to the 248 positive commandments in the Torah and the 248 limbs of the human body (Midrash Ne’elam; quoted by the Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 61:3.) Thus, the recitation of the Shema, with its affirmation of God’s kingship and Unity, imbues the totality of one’s being with these fundamental concepts.

And must therefore recite the Shema again.

Needless to say, it is not desirable to read the Shema in this manner and, at the outset, one should attempt to read the entire Shema with proper concentration.

I.e., he was examining these particular sections in a scroll to ensure their correctness.

I.e., he must have the unique level of intention that is required for the first verse, as mentioned above. The Kessef Mishneh explains that intention of any kind is necessary for only the first verse and, afterwards, one could continue studying or proofreading in a normal fashion, provided he reads the words properly. The Magen Avraham also supports this position (Orach Chayim 60:5).

This is based on Hillel’s interpretation of the verse “... and when you walk on the way” (Deuteronomy 6:7). (See the notes to Chapter 1 Halachah 1 for further elucidation.).

Berachot 11a expands the mishnah’s teachings in this manner.

Kiddushin 33b equates riding on the back of an animal with walking.

Rashi (Berachot 13b) explains that these positions are improper because they imply an attitude of haughtiness which is inappropriate at the time one must accept the yoke of Heaven.

He should be completely on his side, since Berachot (ibid.) also forbids reciting the Shema while turned slightly over onto one’s side, unless extraordinary circumstances prevail, as explained by the Rambam in this halachah.

Rabbenu Manoach states that it is forbidden for anyone else to read in such a fashion as mentioned above. They should sit upright in a position evoking awe and fear while reciting the Shema.

In order to concentrate his attention. Berachot 13b mentions two opinions regarding the extent of the Shema one must recite before he may continue on his way:
that of Rav Yehudah who requires the first two verses of the Shema to be recited standing;
and that of Rabbi Yochanan who requires the entire Shema to be recited in a stationary position.
Rav Yitzchak Alfasi explains that the actual halachah does not follow either of these positions, but rather is in accordance with the view of Rabbi Meir that only the first verse requires absolute intention. (See Halachah 1.) The Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 63:3 also accepts this decision.

For, as stated above, concentrated attention is not an absolute prerequisite for reading these passages.

Berachot, op. cit., explains that one unavoidably overcome by sleep after having recited the first verse has fulfilled his obligation. The Kessef Mishneh notes that the majority of the Rishonim hold that this leniency is granted on the condition that he, nevertheless, manages to recite the rest of the Shema, albeit in a drowsy state. Thus, our halachah mentions the necessity of alertness for the first verse within the context of the halachot of the intention required to read the Shema. In Halachah 12, the Rambam discusses sleepiness within the context of the need for proper enunciation of the words of the Kri’at Shema. That halachah supports the Kessef Mishneh’s position that one fulfills one’s obligation only if he also recites the rest of the Shema.

A careful reading of the Rambam’s words leads one to support the position of the Kessef Mishneh. After the first verse, the Rambam mentions only that we need not disturb the person, but he does not write that we should not awaken him. This could mean that although we are not obligated to disturb him to such an extent that he is aroused to a state of full alertness, we are obligated to awaken him so that he can finish Kri’at Shema before going back to sleep. (See Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 63:5.).

This and the next three halachot pertain to a person involved in other activities when the time to read the Shema arrives.

Rav Yitzchak Alfasi explains that this applies even according to the halachically accepted position of Rabbi Meir, that utmost concentration is necessary for the first verse only. (See the notes to Halachah 1.)
The obligation to have proper concentration and the necessity that one’s recitation of the Shema not appear haphazard are two different halachic requirements.

Employed by others, whose time, therefore, is not their own. Even so, they must interrupt their work in order to recite Kri’at Shema.
[Parenthetically, we can derive an important concept regarding business ethics from this halachah. If there is a question whether an artisan can interrupt his work to fulfill his fundamental religious obligations, surely, he must serve his employer faithfully at other times.]

I.e., a casual matter, regarded lightly. See the commentary to Halachah 8.

This applies both to a person working for himself as well as to a paid artisan.

Despite the obvious difficulties this poses regarding his ability to concentrate, the Rambam allows a worker to remain in the tree or on the wall and recite the Shema. Rabbenu Manoach holds that only the workers may remain in the tree. In contrast, a foreman who is there to encourage his work force, must descend from the tree and recite it on the ground. The Tur and the Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 63:8 both disagree with this and allow both of them to recite it while in the tree.

The obligation to recite the Shema also includes the obligation to recite its blessings (Kessef Mishneh on Halachah 5).

Shabbat 9b, 11a states that a person should interrupt his Torah study for Kri’at Shema, but not for the Amidah prayers. This refers even to Sages like Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai who would never interrupt their Torah study except to perform mitzvot which could not be performed by others. The acceptance of the yoke of God’s kingship in the Shema is fundamentally necessary even for a person with such an all encompassing commitment to Torah. Similarly, as stated above, Berachot 10b states that the recitation of the Shema at its proper time is preferable to the study of Torah.

The Jerusalem Talmud (Berachot 5:1) equates involvement in community matters to the study of Torah, in terms of granting an exemption from prayer. The Tosefta, (Berachot 1:4) relates:
Rabbi Yehudah says: Once I was following Rabbi Akiva and Rabbi Elazar ben Azariah. The time of Kri’at Shema arrived (but they did not perform the mitzvah). I was under the impression that they felt unable to. They were, however, involved in community matters.
(See also Tosefta Berachot 2:6.)

Berachot 11a derives this concept from the verse “when you walk on your way” (Deuteronomy 6:7). This implies that “on your way,” i.e., while you are involved in your activities, you must read the Shema. In contrast, if one is involved in matters concerning a mitzvah—and matters of communal importance are equivalent to matters concerning a mitzvah—there is no obligation. (See Mishnah Berurah 70:16.)

This implies that even were the time of Kri’at Shema to pass without him reciting the Shema, he need not interrupt his activities (Kessef Mishneh).

The Shulchan Aruch HaRav 70:5 and the Mishnah Berurah 70:23 rule that if one began eating or the like before the time to recite the Shema arrives, one is not obligated to cease when the time for the recitation of the Shema arrives. If, however, one began after the time for the recitation of the Shema began, he is obligated to cease that activity.

I.e., if he is one of the judges.

There is a question whether the Rambam refers to 6 minutes before sunrise, the optimum time to recite the Shema, or the end of the third hour of the day beyond which one does not fulfill the mitzvah (See Chapter 1, Halachah 11-13). According to other authorities, the latter view would be followed.

I.e., as long as he is able both to complete what he is doing and to recite the Shema before the end of the proper time for Kri’at Shema, he may complete his task.

This is based on the Mishnah in Berachot 22b.

As mentioned in Chapter 1, Halachah 11, the optimum time to recite the Shema in the morning is shortly before sunrise.

As mentioned in Chapter 1, Halachah 11, the optimum time to recite the Shema in the morning is shortly before sunrise.

These statements reinforce the explanation given in the commentary to Chapter 1, Halachah 11, that the recitation of the Shema after sunrise is only allowed after the fact. Here, the Rambam states that it is preferable to read the Shema while naked in the water, than to get out, dress, and recite it after that time has passed.

Berachot 24b equates one who recites the Shema in a place with an unpleasant odor to one who has profaned the word of God. One who stops reciting in such a place is praised, and Deuteronomy 32:47 says about him “... in those words, your days will be lengthened.” Chapter 3 deals with many halachot regarding the recitation of the Shema in unclean surroundings.

In the Hebrew text of the Rambam and in the Mishnah, the term used is מי משרה (water of soaking). This is understood as water used for soaking flax or canvas, which has a bad smell (Rashi, Berachot 25b).

Chapter 3, Halachot 16 and 17, explain that it is forbidden to read the Shema in the presence of “nakedness.”

See Berachot 25a.

After discussing the intention necessary for Kri’at Shema and the proper reaction when involved in other activities as the time for the recitation of Shema arrives, the Rambam now deals with the halachot regarding the proper recitation of the words themselves. This discussion continues until the end of the chapter.

Yoma 19b distinguishes between the first section of Kri’at Shema and the second in this regard, forbidding these activities only during the recitation of the first section. Indeed, in Halachah 4 which also deals with a “haphazard” recitation of the Shema, the Rambam, himself makes such a distinction. The Lechem Mishneh explains that the Rambam relies on his statements in Halachah 4. Rabbenu Manoach explains that the Rambam did not clarify the matter explicitly lest he cheapen the value of the second section in the eyes of his reader. The Kessef Mishneh adds that although making such gestures in the second section is not as “improper” as during the first, doing so is, nevertheless, prohibited. See Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 63:7.

Rabbi Acha notes ודברת בם (“and you shall speak of them”) implies making these words a matter of primary importance, and not regarding them as haphazard (Yoma, op. cit.).

Yoma (op. cit.) refers to Isaiah 43:22: “And you have not called upon Me, Jacob,” implying that such a casual reading of the Shema is not considered as calling to God. The Maharsha explains an added implication of the above verse, highlighting the reference to Jacob. As Rashi, in his commentary to Genesis 46:29, relates, when Jacob was first reunited with Joseph, he made no response because he was reciting the Shema at that time. Surely, one who gestures while reading the Shema has certainly not achieved the desired level of devotion.

This is derived from the word Shema—literally “hear”—in the first verse. It implies that one should make audible to himself that which he says (Berachot 15a).

The entire latter portion of this halachah is based on Berachot 15a:
One who recites the Shema so that the words are not audible to himself has fulfilled his obligation. Rabbi Yossi says that he has not fulfilled his obligation.
If he reads, but does not enunciate clearly: Rabbi Yossi says that he has fulfilled his obligation. Rabbi Yehudah says that he has not.
The Talmud concludes (ibid. 15b) that the halachah is in accordance with the lenient position in both cases—i.e., the anonymous opinion in the first case and Rabbi Yossi in the second.
Rav Yitzchak Alfasi adds that this is only after the fact. A priori (לכתחילה), one must read in such a way as to be audible to himself and enunciate the letters clearly. The Rambam follows this view.
Nevertheless, one must at least mouth the words of Kri’at Shema, even if he does not pronounce them loudly enough that they are audible to himself. Thought is not regarded like speech. (See the notes to Halachah 3.) Therefore, one who does not even move his lips, but just thinks about the words as he “reads” them, does not fulfill his obligation (Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 62:3).

Berachot 15b derives this from the word ולמדתם—“And you shall teach them.” It can be divided into two words ולמד תם, implying that your teaching (ולמד) must be תם—perfect.

Berachot, ibid. notes that if a person reads the Shema with proper enunciation, “Gehinom will be cooled off for him.”

A pronunciation mark implying that the syllable should be stressed.

E. g., were one to say vedivarta vam instead of the proper pronunciation, vedibarta bam (Deuteronomy 6:7).

E. g., בכל לבבך (Deuteronomy 6:5) bekol lebabcha instead of the proper pronunciation, bechol levavcha.

E. g., to say bechol levavecha instead of bechol levavcha.

E. g., to pronounce בכל נפשך (Deuteronomy 6:5) bechol nafshcha instead of bechol nafsh’cha.

Lest the two be heard as a single word.

Berachot 15b mentions even more cases of problematic words. The Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 61:20 quotes all the examples found in the Talmud. There are other cases in Kri’at Shema where this problem arises, such as veahavta et (Deuteronomy 6:5). In all these cases care must be exercised to separate the words clearly.
It is interesting to note that the Rambam mentions one example from each of the three sections of Kri’at Shema, in order to teach us that enunciation is equally important in all the sections.

In order that he not say tiscaru—i.e., in order that he not declare: “you will garner reward.”

Berachot 13b relates:
Sumkos says: Anyone who lengthens the pronunciation of echad, his days and years are lengthened.
Rav Acha bar Ya’akov understands that to refer to the dalet [of Echad]. Rav Ashi says that this is on condition that he not shorten the chet.
Rav Yirmiah was sitting before Rav Chiyyah bar Abba and noticed that he severely lengthened [his dalet]. He said to him that once he had proclaimed God, King above and below and to the four directions of the Heavens, he need not continue [to prolong the dalet]. The Maharsha mentions that the chet (numerical value of eight) corresponds to the Earth and the seven levels of Heaven, and the dalet (numerical value of four) corresponds to the four directions.

If one pronounces a long aleph and a short chet, he will say something that sounds like ee-chad (not one)—i.e., he would seem to be proclaiming exactly the opposite of echad.

Berachot 13a records a disagreement between Rabbi Yehudah Hanasi, who holds that the Shema must be read as it is—i.e., in lashon hakodesh—and the Sages, who hold that it may be recited in any language. The latter explain that the word Shema—literally, “hear,”—indicates the acceptability of any language that one hears—i.e., understands.

Mishnah Berurah (62:3) points out that although the halachah is indeed that one may recite the Shema, grace after meals, the silent Amidah, and Kiddush on Shabbat in any language, at present, it is highly preferable to say them all in Hebrew.

The Mishnah (Berachot 15a) states that one who recites the Shema out of order does not fulfill his obligation. The Rambam understands this to refer only to placing verse 2 before verse 1, but not to placing section 2 before section 1, as he states in the continuation of this halachah.

Described in Chapter 1, Halachah 2.

For the order established by our Sages should be followed.

This expression implies that this is the Rambam’s opinion although he has no definite support for it from our Sages’ teachings.

I.e., the sections do not appear in the Shema in the same order as they are in the Torah itself.

Berachot 33b distinguishes between one who repeats a whole verse and one who repeats the word Shema, as the Rambam discusses immediately after this.

Rashi explains that, although the person has acted frivolously and has not shown the proper respect to the verse, he has not indicated the existence of two rulers with such a reading. In contrast, the repetition of Shema or Modim (We thank You)—the examples cited explicitly in the Mishnah—appears to indicate that one is paying respect to two kings, ו”ח. Rabbi Moshe Feinstein points out (Iggerot Moshe, Orach Chayim, Vol. II, Responsa 22) that even in the course of singing the prayers, one should not repeat words as cantors are prone to do, even though it does not constitute an interruption per se.

I.e., he recites part of the Shema and then stops, and then continues reciting, and stops again, etc.

This halachah is mentioned with regard to the reading of Megillat Esther on Purim in the Mishnah in Megillah 17a. In his commentary to that mishnah, the Rambam explains that the one who reads intermittently fulfills his obligation even if he pauses long enough to finish the whole Megillah.
Berachot 24b applies that halachah not only to the reading of the Megillah, which is a Rabbinic ordinance, but also to the recitation of the Shema, which is a Scriptural obligation. See also Hilchot Shofar 3:5.
The Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 65:1 quotes the Rambam’s statements as halachah. The Rama cites the Ashkenazic authorities who maintain that were one to be unavoidably detained during the recitation of the Shema for a period long enough to finish the entire Kri’at Shema, he must recite it again. Such an interruption is considered significant, since even if he had wanted to finish the Shema, he would have been unable to do so.
The Magen Avraham points out that the Rama’s position would apply only in the case that one were unavoidably detained by the need to relieve himself, or that he suddenly found himself in a place unfit for the recitation of Kri’at Shema. (The halachot concerning these laws are discussed in Chapter 3.)

As required by the previous halachah.

See Berachot 13b.

I.e., in order that he recite the first verse with the intense concentration required by Halachah 3.

Berachot 21a records a disagreement between Rabbi Yehudah and Rabbi Elazar. Rabbi Yehudah says that one who is doubtful regarding whether or not he recited the Shema need not read it again, since Kri’at Shema is a Rabbinical ordinance and we follow the rule a doubt in a Rabbinical ordinance leads to a lenient response.
Rabbi Elazar says that he must recite the Shema in such a situation of doubt because Kri’at Shema is a Scriptural obligation. Therefore, the principle—ספק דאורייתא לחומרא [a doubt regarding a Scriptural Law leads to a strict response]—should be followed. Rabbenu Yitzchak Alfasi and Rabbenu Asher also follow Rabbi Elazar’s opinion.

The Rashba in Responsum 320 explains that although the blessings are of Rabbinic origin and, therefore, we should not require one to say them in a situation of doubt (see above, לקולא ספק דרבנן), the proper recitation of the Shema is inseparable from its blessings. Therefore, since we obligate one in doubt to recite the Shema, this entails the recitation of the Shema in its normal fashion—i.e., with its blessings. (See Kessef Mishneh.)

Since he has definitely fulfilled the Scriptural obligation of Kri’at Shema, we invoke the aforementioned rule of לקולא ספק דרבנן with regard to the blessings, which alone are of Rabbinic origin. (See Hilchot Berachot 8:12.)

I.e., if one skipped over or mispronounced a word or verse.

And then continue to read in order, from that verse until the end of Kri’at Shema, in accordance with Halachah 11 in this chapter. See Tosefta, Berachot 2:4.

I.e., finding himself at a point where it is natural to pause (e.g., between the first section and the second), he becomes confused and forgets exactly what he has finished saying and where he must resume reading.

Berachot 16a states that when one errs in the middle of a section, he returns to the beginning of the section. Were he to become confused between sections, he returns to the first section. Rashi explains that returning to the first section means to the pause between the first two sections, i.e., one would begin reading from ViHayah Im Shamoa, the second section in Kri’at Shema. The Tur, Orach Chayim 64 also explains the halachah in this fashion.
The Rambam, however, understands that the Gemara obligates one to return to the beginning of the first section. The Beit Yosef explains that both Rashi and the Rambam agree that one must return to the point of the first pause in Kri’at Shema. The Rambam, however, holds that the first pause one makes while reading the Shema is not between the first two sections. Rather, it is after the recitation of ברוך שם כבוד מלכותו לעולם ועד. This signifies the transition between one’s acceptance of the kingship of Heaven and the beginning of the recitation of the Shema. The Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 61:14 states the halachah that one must pause between ברוך שם and ואהבת. However, its decision regarding the law under discussion (ibid. 64:3) reflects Rashi’s position.

This is so only if he is completely unaware of where he erred. However, were he to be absolutely sure that he recited part of a particular section, he should start reciting again from after that point (Kessef Mishneh).

This halachah is found in the continuation of Berachot 16a, quoted above.

I.e., the first section, which begins with Shema Yisrael.

I.e., the second section of Kri’at Shema, which begins with these words.

In their glosses to the Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 64:4, both the Taz and the Magen Avraham explain that this problem does not arise with the word וקשרתם “And you shall bind,” which also appears in both of the first two sections of Kri’at Shema. In the first section, this word is written with a kamatz וקשרתם (And you [singular] shall bind them), whereas in the second section it is written with a segol וקשרתם (And you [plural] shall bind...).”

I.e., we assume he recited למען in its proper place, at the end of the second section of Shema.

Having discussed in the previous halachot the proper reaction to unintentional interruptions in Kri’at Shema, the Rambam now discusses when one must purposefully interrupt his reading of the Shema in order to greet people or respond to their greetings. These halachot are based on the Mishnah (Berachot 13a):
“Between sections, one may initiate greetings out of respect, and respond. In the middle [of a section], one may initiate greetings out of fear, and respond,” these are the words of Rabbi Meir.
Rabbi Yehudah says: “In the middle [of a section] one may initiate contact out of respect, and respond out of fear. Between sections, one may initiate out of respect and respond to anyone’s greeting.”

This term is defined in Halachah 17.

I.e., he may initiate the contact.

The Rambam explains the term mipnai hakavod (out of respect) used in the Mishnah as referring to those one is obligated to honor according to Scriptural Law; i.e., one’s parents in response to the command “Honor your father and your mother” (Exodus 20:12).

I.e., one who taught him Torah. Hilchot Talmud Torah 5:1 states:
Just as a person is commanded to honor his father and fear him, so too, is he obligated to honor and fear his teacher. Indeed, his teacher deserves more than his father. His father brought him into the life of this world, while his teacher... brings him to the life of the world to come.

Hilchot Talmud Torah 6:1 states: “It is a mitzvah to glorify any Torah Sage even though he is not one’s teacher.”

This applies even when one is in the middle of a verse (Jerusalem Talmud, as cited by Rabbenu Asher.)
Rabbenu Manoach explains this idea. After making an interruption, one should continue reading where he left off only when the break does not entail the interruption of a single idea. However, when a person is forced to make an interruption after stating only half of an idea, he should repeat the whole verse after the completion of his greeting lest he create a misconception. In the middle of the verses, שמע ישראל or Baruch Shem Kavod…, one may not interrupt at any time unless one’s life is in danger (Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 66:1).

The term מפני היראה (out of fear) used in the abovementioned Mishnah refers to a king or tyrant—i.e., someone of whom one is physically afraid. Rashi explains fear as referring to someone who one is afraid will kill him. Rabbenu Asher takes issue with Rashi’s explanation of fear. He points out that it is unnecessary for the Mishnah to inform us that in the case of פיקוח נפש (a life-threatening situation), one may interrupt Kri’at Shema. Even violation of the Shabbat is permitted in such instances. Therefore, Rabbenu Asher explains “out of fear” as referring to one’s father or rabbi, people whom one is commanded to fear. For Leviticus 19:3 states: “Every person must revere his mother and father.” And Pirkei Avot 4:12 and Pesachim 108a state that the fear of one’s rabbi is similar to the fear of Heaven. See also Hilchot Talmud Torah 5:1.
The Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 66:1 accepts Rashi’s position regarding honor and Rabbenu Asher’s interpretation of fear. He also mentions the Rambam’s understanding of “out of fear,” as referring to a king or tyrant—this refers to one who is likely to cause pain or sorrow (Kessef Mishneh).

See the notes to the previous halachah. The Mishnah Berurah, Orach Chayim 66:2 explains that at present, one should never greet [or return greetings of] anyone during Kri’at Shema, nor even during פסוקי דזמרה, the verses of praise that precede Kri’at Shema and its blessings, unless it is clear that such a person will be insulted. Since people do not expect one to interrupt Kri’at Shema in order to greet them, such an insult is extremely rare indeed. One should, however, interrupt at any point [except in the middle of the verses שמע ישראל and ברוך שם כבוד] in order to respond to Kaddish (יהא שמיה רבא), Kedushah (קדוש קדוש קדוש), Barchu and Modim. (See Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 66:3, the Mishnah Berurah there and Shulchan Aruch HaRav, Orach Chayim 66:4.)
In his responsa, the Rambam also forbids the inclusion of hymns within the blessings [as is Ashkenazic custom on festivals], considering them as an interruption.

This decision is based on the principle that the blessings before the Shema—though necessary to develop the meditative consciousness necessary for the correct intention during Shema—are not considered as directly related to the Shema itself. Accordingly, though it is forbidden to make an interruption between the recitation of a blessing before a mitzvah and the actual fulfillment of the mitzvah, these interruptions are permitted between the blessings before the Shema and the Shema.

As explained above in Halachah 15.

Berachot 14b explains the significance of the proximity of the end of Kri’at Shema, א-להיכם אני ה', to the word Emet. This is based on a verse in Jeremiah 10:10, ה' א-להיכם אמת and proclaims that “God, your Lord, is true.” Thus, these words do not represent a break between sections, but rather a continuum.

As explained in the previous halachah.