Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility Skip to content

Today's Daf Yomi

January 14, 2020 | 讬状讝 讘讟讘转 转砖状驻

  • This month's learning is sponsored by the Kessler, Wolkenfeld and Grossman families in loving memory of Mia Rose bat Matan Yehoshua v鈥 Elana Malka. "讛 谞转谉 讜讛 诇拽讞. 讬讛讬 砖诐 讛 诪讘讜专讱"

  • This month's shiurim are sponsored by Shoshana Shur for the refuah shleima of Meira Bat Zelda Zahava.

Berakhot 11

From the phrase “when you sit in your house and when you walk on your way” one derives that one who is occupied with a mitzvah or a groom on the night of his wedding are exempt from saying shema. The groom is exempt because his mind is preoccupied with the fulfillment of a mitzvah. Can one derived from here that one who is preoccupied for other reasons would be exempt also even if not for a mitzvah? A mourner is obligated in all mitzvot except for tefillin (he is exempt on the first day only). Can one hold like Beit Shamai and lie down for shema at night and stand up in the morning? Vatious opinions are brought. What are the blessings before shema in the morning? On what type of learning does one need to say the blessings on the Torah for? What is the blessing that needs to be said? In Masechet Tamid, there is a description of the prayers of the priests in the Temple. They said only one blessing before shema. Which one?

转讜讻谉 讝讛 转讜专讙诐 讙诐 诇: 注讘专讬转

讙诪壮 讘砖诇诪讗 讘讬转 讛诇诇 拽讗 诪驻专砖讬 讟注诪讬讬讛讜 讜讟注诪讗 讚讘讬转 砖诪讗讬 讗诇讗 讘讬转 砖诪讗讬 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 诇讗 讗诪专讬 讻讘讬转 讛诇诇

GEMARA: The Gemara begins by clarifying the rationale for Beit Shammai鈥檚 opinion. Granted, Beit Hillel explain the rationale for their opinion and the rationale for Beit Shammai鈥檚 opinion. Beit Hillel explain both the verse that ostensibly supports Beit Shammai鈥檚 opinion: When you lie down, at the time when people lie down, etc., and the verse that proves that their own explanation is more reasonable: 鈥淎nd when you walk along the way.鈥 However, what is the reason that Beit Shammai do not state their opinion in accordance with the opinion of Beit Hillel?

讗诪专讬 诇讱 讘讬转 砖诪讗讬 讗诐 讻谉 谞讬诪讗 拽专讗 讘讘拽专 讜讘注专讘 诪讗讬 讘砖讻讘讱 讜讘拽讜诪讱 讘砖注转 砖讻讬讘讛 砖讻讬讘讛 诪诪砖 讜讘砖注转 拽讬诪讛 拽讬诪讛 诪诪砖

The Gemara answers, Beit Shammai could have said to you: If so that the verse means only to denote the time for the recitation of Shema, as claimed by Beit Hillel, then let the verse say: 鈥淚n the morning and in the evening.鈥 What is the meaning of the ambiguous formulation: 鈥淲hen you lie down, and when you rise鈥? It must mean that at the time of lying down one must recite Shema while actually lying down, and at the time of arising one must recite Shema while actually risen.

讜讘讬转 砖诪讗讬 讛讗讬 讜讘诇讻转讱 讘讚专讱 诪讗讬 注讘讬讚 诇讛讜

The Gemara continues, asking: And what do Beit Shammai do with this verse: 鈥淎nd when you walk along the way,鈥 which Beit Hillel use to prove that every person recites Shema as he is?

讛讛讜讗 诪讘注讬 诇讛讜 诇讻讚转谞讬讗 讘砖讘转讱 讘讘讬转讱 驻专讟 诇注讜住拽 讘诪爪讜讛 讜讘诇讻转讱 讘讚专讱 驻专讟 诇讞转谉 诪讻讗谉 讗诪专讜 讛讻讜谞住 讗转 讛讘转讜诇讛 驻讟讜专 讜讗转 讛讗诇诪谞讛 讞讬讬讘

The Gemara answers: Beit Shammai need this verse in order to derive other halakhot, as it was taught in a baraita which interpreted this verse that the obligation to recite Shema applies when you sit in your home, to the exclusion of one who is engaged in performance of a mitzva, who is exempt from the recitation of Shema; and when you walk along the way, to the exclusion of a groom, who is also exempt from the recitation of Shema. The baraita adds that from here, from this interpretation of the verses, they said: One who marries a virgin is exempt from the recitation of Shema on his wedding night, but one who marries a widow is obligated.

诪讗讬 诪砖诪注

The Gemara clarifies the meaning of this baraita, and asks: From where may it be inferred that the verse, when you walk along the way, exempts a groom from the obligation to recite Shema?

讗诪专 专讘 驻驻讗 讻讬 讚专讱 诪讛 讚专讱 专砖讜转 讗祝 讻诇 专砖讜转

Rav Pappa said that we learn: Like the way; just as the journey along a specific way described in the verse is voluntary and involves no mitzva, so too all of those who are obligated to recite Shema are engaged in voluntary activities. However, one engaged in the performance of a mitzva, like a groom, is exempt from the obligation to recite Shema.

诪讬 诇讗 注住拽讬谞谉 讚拽讗 讗讝讬诇 诇讚讘专 诪爪讜讛 讜讗驻讬诇讜 讛讻讬 讗诪专 专讞诪谞讗 诇拽专讬 讗诐 讻谉 诇讻转讜讘 专讞诪谞讗 讘砖讘转 讜讘诇讻转 诪讗讬 讘砖讘转讱 讜讘诇讻转讱 讘砖讘转 讚讬讚讱 讜讘诇讻转 讚讬讚讱 讛讜讗 讚诪讞讬讬讘转 讛讗 讚诪爪讜讛 驻讟讬专转

The Gemara asks: Are we not dealing with a case where one walks along the way to perform a mitzva? The Torah did not designate the objective of his walk and, nevertheless, the Torah said to recite Shema, indicating that one is obligated even if he set out to perform a mitzva. Rather, the proof is from the formulation of the verse. If so, that the intention was to obligate in all cases, let the Torah write: When sitting and when walking. What is the meaning of: When you sit and when you walk? Certainly these additions come to emphasize in your sitting down and in your walking, meaning that when one does this for his own purposes and of his own volition, he is obligated to recite Shema, but when he does with the objective of performing a mitzva, he is exempt from reciting Shema, as in that case he is sitting or walking at God鈥檚 behest.

讗讬 讛讻讬 讗驻讬诇讜 讻讜谞住 讗转 讛讗诇诪谞讛 谞诪讬

The conclusion is that anyone engaged in the performance of a mitzva is exempt from the recitation of Shema. If so, even one who marries a widow should be exempt, for he, too, is engaged in performance of a mitzva. That, however, contradicts the baraita.

讛讗讬 讟专讬讚 讜讛讗讬 诇讗 讟专讬讚

The Gemara responds that there is nevertheless a distinction between one marrying a virgin and one marrying a widow. One who marries a virgin is preoccupied by his concern lest he discover that his bride is not a virgin, while one who marries a widow is not preoccupied. The conclusion is that the groom is exempt from reciting Shema because he is preoccupied.

讗讬 诪砖讜诐 讟专讚讗 讗驻讬诇讜 讟讘注讛 住驻讬谞转讜 讘讬诐 谞诪讬 讜讻讬 转讬诪讗 讛讻讬 谞诪讬 讗诇诪讛 讗诪专 专讘讬 讗讘讗 讘专 讝讘讚讗 讗诪专 专讘 讗讘诇 讞讬讬讘 讘讻诇 讛诪爪讜转 讛讗诪讜专讜转 讘转讜专讛 讞讜抓 诪谉 讛转驻讬诇讬谉 砖讛专讬 谞讗诪专 讘讛诐 驻讗专 砖谞讗诪专 驻讗专讱 讞讘讜砖 注诇讬讱

The Gemara asks: If the exemption is due to preoccupation, then even one who is preoccupied because his ship sank at sea should also be exempt. The Gemara reinforces its question: And if you say that in this case as well, when one鈥檚 ship sank at sea, one is exempt, why then did Rabbi Abba bar Zavda say that Rav said: A mourner is obligated in all the mitzvot mentioned in the Torah except for the mitzva to don phylacteries, from which a mourner is exempt, as the term splendor is stated with regard to phylacteries, as it is stated: 鈥淢ake no mourning for the dead, bind your splendor upon yourself鈥 (Ezekiel 24:17). It is inappropriate for a mourner to wrap himself in phylacteries, with regard to which, the term splendor was employed (Tosafot). If a mourner, who is clearly pained and preoccupied, is obligated to recite Shema, then certainly all others who are preoccupied, even one whose ship sank at sea, whose loss was merely monetary (Birkat Hashem), should be obligated. Why, then, is a groom exempted because of his preoccupation and one who lost his property is not?

讛转诐 讟专讬讚 讟专讚讗 讚诪爪讜讛 讛讻讗 讟专讬讚 讟专讚讗 讚专砖讜转

The Gemara answers: Nevertheless, there is a distinction between the cases. For there, in the case of a groom, he is preoccupied with the preoccupation of a mitzva that he must perform; here, in the case of a ship lost at sea, he is preoccupied with the preoccupation of a voluntary act that he chooses to perform.

讜讘讬转 砖诪讗讬

Here, the Gemara returns to its initial question: And how do Beit Shammai explain the passage: 鈥淲hen you walk along the way鈥 (Rashash)?

讛讛讜讗 诪讘注讬 诇讛讜 驻专讟 诇砖诇讜讞讬 诪爪讜讛

The Gemara answers: Beit Shammai need this passage in order to exclude one who is on the path to perform a mitzva from the obligation to recite Shema.

讜讘讬转 讛诇诇 讗诪专讬 诪诪讬诇讗 砖诪注 诪讬谞讛 讚讗驻讬诇讜 讘讚专讱 谞诪讬 拽专讬:

Beit Hillel also agree that one engaged in the performance of a mitzva is exempt from reciting Shema? If so, the halakha that they derived from: When you walk along the way lacks a source and is therefore unfounded. And Beit Hillel say: Derive from this halakha itself that one who is not an agent in the performance of a mitzva recites Shema even along the way.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讘讬转 讛诇诇 讗讜诪专讬诐 注讜诪讚讬谉 讜拽讜专讬谉 讬讜砖讘讬谉 讜拽讜专讬谉 讜诪讟讬谉 讜拽讜专讬谉 讛讜诇讻讬谉 讘讚专讱 讜拽讜专讬谉 注讜砖讬谉 讘诪诇讗讻转谉 讜拽讜专讬谉 讜诪注砖讛 讘专讘讬 讬砖诪注讗诇 讜专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 讘谉 注讝专讬讛 砖讛讬讜 诪住讜讘讬谉 讘诪拽讜诐 讗讞讚 讜讛讬讛 专讘讬 讬砖诪注讗诇 诪讜讟讛 讜专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 讘谉 注讝专讬讛 讝拽讜祝 讻讬讜谉 砖讛讙讬注 讝诪谉 拽专讬讗转 砖诪注 讛讟讛 专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 讜讝拽祝 专讘讬 讬砖诪注讗诇 讗诪专 诇讜 专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 讘谉 注讝专讬讛 诇专讘讬 讬砖诪注讗诇 讬砖诪注讗诇 讗讞讬 讗诪砖讜诇 诇讱 诪砖诇 诇诪讛 讛讚讘专 讚讜诪讛 诪砖诇 诇讗讞讚 砖讗讜诪专讬诐 诇讜 讝拽谞讱 诪讙讜讚诇 讗诪专 诇讛诐 讬讛讬讛 讻谞讙讚 讛诪砖讞讬转讬诐 讗祝 讻讱 讗转讛 讻诇 讝诪谉 砖讗谞讬 讝拽讜祝 讗转讛 诪讜讟讛 注讻砖讬讜 讻砖讗谞讬 讛讟转讬 讗转讛 讝拽驻转

The Sages taught in a baraita that Beit Hillel say: One may recite Shema in any situation: Standing and reciting, sitting and reciting, reclining and reciting, walking and reciting and even working and reciting. And in the Tosefta an incident is related where two tanna鈥檌m, Rabbi Yishmael and Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya, who were both disciples of Beit Hillel, were reclining at a meal in one place together with their students, and Rabbi Yishmael was reclined as was the customary dining position, and Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya was upright. When the time to recite the evening Shema arrived, Rabbi Elazar reclined to recite Shema in accordance with the opinion of Beit Shammai, while Rabbi Yishmael sat upright to recite Shema. Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya appeared to take offense, and said to Rabbi Yishmael: Yishmael, my brother, I will tell you a parable to which this is similar. It is comparable to a situation where one to whom people say as a compliment: Your beard is full and suits you. That man says to them: May it be against those who shave and destroy their beards, i.e., the only reason I grow my beard is to irritate those who cut their own (Rashba). You are the same. As long as I am upright, you are reclined, and now when I reclined lauding your conduct and emulating you, you sat upright as if to demonstrate that whatever I do, you do the opposite.

讗诪专 诇讜 讗谞讬 注砖讬转讬 讻讚讘专讬 讘讬转 讛诇诇 讜讗转讛 注砖讬转 讻讚讘专讬 讘讬转 砖诪讗讬 讜诇讗 注讜讚 讗诇讗 砖诪讗 讬专讗讜 讛转诇诪讬讚讬诐 讜讬拽讘注讜 讛诇讻讛 诇讚讜专讜转

Rabbi Yishmael said to him: I acted in accordance with the opinion of Beit Hillel, according to whom one may recite Shema in any position, while you acted in accordance with the opinion of Beit Shammai. I am the one who acted in accordance with the halakha. And furthermore, I was concerned lest the students see your conduct and establish the halakha for generations accordingly. It was therefore necessary for me to demonstrate that there is no obligation to do so.

诪讗讬 讜诇讗 注讜讚

The Gemara asks: What is the meaning of: And furthermore? Why was it necessary for Rabbi Yishmael to add additional justification for his actions when the reason that he acted in accordance with the opinion of Beit Hillel was sufficient?

讜讻讬 转讬诪讗 讘讬转 讛诇诇 谞诪讬 讗讬转 诇讛讜 诪讟讬谉 讛谞讬 诪讬诇讬 讚诪讟讛 讜讗转讗 诪注讬拽专讗 讗讘诇 讛讻讗 讻讬讜谉 讚注讚 讛砖转讗 讛讜讬转 讝拽讜祝 讜讛砖转讗 诪讜讟讛 讗诪专讬 砖诪注 诪讬谞讛 讻讘讬转 砖诪讗讬 住讘讬专讗 诇讛讜 砖诪讗 讬专讗讜 讛转诇诪讬讚讬诐 讜讬拽讘注讜 讛诇讻讛 诇讚讜专讜转

The Gemara answers: It was necessary for him to add this reason, as if you say: Beit Hillel also hold that one is permitted to recite Shema while reclining and Rabbi Yishmael could have remained reclining even in accordance with the opinion of Beit Hillel, but this only applies when one had already been reclining originally, in which case it is like any other position. However, here, since until now he had been upright, and now he is reclined, the students will say: Conclude from this, that they hold in accordance with the opinion of Beit Shammai. Due to the concern that the students might see and establish the halakha for generations in accordance with the opinion of Beit Shammai, it was necessary for Rabbi Yishmael to sit upright.

转谞讬 专讘 讬讞讝拽讗诇 注砖讛 讻讚讘专讬 讘讬转 砖诪讗讬 注砖讛 讻讚讘专讬 讘讬转 讛诇诇 注砖讛

Rav Ye岣zkel taught: One who acted in accordance with the opinion of Beit Shammai has acted appropriately and is not in violation of the halakha. One who acted in accordance with the opinion of Beit Hillel acted appropriately as well. According to this opinion, Beit Hillel and Beit Shammai agree that one who acted in accordance with the opinion of the other fulfilled his obligation. Although the halakha was ruled in accordance with the opinion of Beit Hillel, Beit Hillel would agree that one who acted in accordance with the opinion of Beit Shammai fulfilled his obligation.

专讘 讬讜住祝 讗诪专 注砖讛 讻讚讘专讬 讘讬转 砖诪讗讬 诇讗 注砖讛 讜诇讗 讻诇讜诐 讚转谞谉 诪讬 砖讛讬讛 专讗砖讜 讜专讜讘讜 讘住讜讻讛 讜砖诇讞谞讜 讘转讜讱 讛讘讬转 讘讬转 砖诪讗讬 驻讜住诇讬谉 讜讘讬转 讛诇诇 诪讻砖讬专讬谉

However, Rav Yosef said: One who acts in accordance with the opinion of Beit Shammai has done nothing and must repeat Shema in accordance with the opinion of Beit Hillel, as we learned in the mishna with regard to the halakhot of a sukka: One who had his head and most of his body in the sukka, and his table upon which he was eating inside the house, Beit Shammai invalidate his action, as he is liable to be drawn after the table and end up eating outside the sukka. And Beit Hillel validate his action, since his head and most of his body remain inside the sukka.

讗诪专讜 诇讛诐 讘讬转 讛诇诇 诇讘讬转 砖诪讗讬 诪注砖讛 砖讛诇讻讜 讝拽谞讬 讘讬转 砖诪讗讬 讜讝拽谞讬 讘讬转 讛诇诇 诇讘拽专 讗转 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讘谉 讛讞讜专谞讬转 诪爪讗讜讛讜 砖讛讬讛 专讗砖讜 讜专讜讘讜 讘住讜讻讛 讜砖诇讞谞讜 讘转讜讱 讛讘讬转 讜诇讗 讗诪专讜 诇讜 讻诇讜诐

Beit Hillel said to Beit Shammai as a proof: There was an incident where the elders of Beit Shammai and the elders of Beit Hillel went on Sukkot to visit Rabbi Yo岣nan ben Ha岣ranit. They found him with his head and most of his body in the sukka and his table inside the house and they said nothing to him. In other words, even Beit Shammai did not object.

讗诪专讜 诇讛诐 讜诪砖诐 专讗讬讛 讗祝 讛诐 讗诪专讜 诇讜 讗诐 讻谉 讛讬讬转 谞讜讛讙 诇讗 拽讬讬诪转 诪爪讜转 住讜讻讛 诪讬诪讬讱

Beit Shammai said to them: And is there proof from there? That is not what happened, rather they said to him explicitly: If you have been accustomed to act in this manner, you have never in your life fulfilled the mitzva of sukka. We see that Beit Shammai held that anyone who did not act in accordance with their opinion, did not fulfill his obligation at all. Similarly, since Beit Hillel鈥檚 opinion was accepted as halakha, anyone who acts in accordance with the opinion of Beit Shammai fails to fulfill his obligation.

专讘 谞讞诪谉 讘专 讬爪讞拽 讗诪专 注砖讛 讻讚讘专讬 讘讬转 砖诪讗讬 讞讬讬讘 诪讬转讛 讚转谞谉 讗诪专 专讘讬 讟专驻讜谉 讗谞讬 讛讬讬转讬 讘讗 讘讚专讱 讜讛讟转讬 诇拽专讜转 讻讚讘专讬 讘讬转 砖诪讗讬 讜住讻谞转讬 讘注爪诪讬 诪驻谞讬 讛诇住讟讬诐 讗诪专讜 诇讜 讻讚讗讬 讛讬讬转 诇讞讜讘 讘注爪诪讱 砖注讘专转 注诇 讚讘专讬 讘讬转 讛诇诇:

Rav Na岣an bar Yitz岣k stated an even more extreme opinion: One who acted in accordance with the opinion of Beit Shammai has acted so egregiously that he is liable to receive the death penalty, as we learned in our mishna that Rabbi Tarfon said to his colleagues: Once, I was coming on the road when I stopped and reclined to recite Shema in accordance with the statement of Beit Shammai. Yet in so doing, I endangered myself due to the highwaymen who accost travelers. The Sages said to him: You deserved to be in a position where you were liable to pay with your life, as you transgressed the statement of Beit Hillel.

诪转谞讬壮 讘砖讞专 诪讘专讱 砖转讬诐 诇驻谞讬讛 讜讗讞转 诇讗讞专讬讛 讜讘注专讘 诪讘专讱 砖转讬诐 诇驻谞讬讛 讜砖转讬诐 诇讗讞专讬讛 讗讞转 讗专讜讻讛 讜讗讞转 拽爪专讛

MISHNA: From the laws of the recitation of Shema itself, the mishna proceeds to discuss the blessings recited in conjunction with Shema. Here, the order is established: In the morning when reciting Shema, one recites two blessings beforehand, the first on the radiant lights and the second the blessing on the love of Torah, and one thereafter, which begins with: True and Firm [emet veyatziv]. And in the evening one recites two blessings beforehand, on the radiant lights and on the love of God, and two thereafter, the blessing of redemption: True and Faithful [emet ve鈥檈muna], and the blessing: Help us lie down. With regard to the blessing: True and Faithful, whether one recites it in its long formula and whether one recites it in its short formula, he fulfills his obligation (Tosafot).

诪拽讜诐 砖讗诪专讜 诇讛讗专讬讱 讗讬谞讜 专砖讗讬 诇拽爪专 诇拽爪专 讗讬谞讜 专砖讗讬 诇讛讗专讬讱 诇讞转讜诐 讗讬谞讜 专砖讗讬 砖诇讗 诇讞转讜诐 砖诇讗 诇讞转讜诐 讗讬谞讜 专砖讗讬 诇讞转讜诐:

However, the general principle is: Where the Sages said to recite a long blessing, one may not shorten it, and so too, wherever they said to recite a short blessing, one may not lengthen it. Where the Sages said that a blessing must conclude with a second blessing at the end, he may not fail to conclude with that blessing. Similarly, if the Sages said that a blessing must not conclude with a second blessing, one may not conclude with a blessing.

讙诪壮 诪讗讬 诪讘专讱

GEMARA: The Gemara begins by determining the formula of the two blessings preceding the morning Shema. The Gemara asks: What blessing does one recite?

讗诪专 专讘讬 讬注拽讘 讗诪专 专讘讬 讗讜砖注讬讗

Rabbi Ya鈥檃kov said in the name of Rabbi Oshaya: The blessing focuses on the verse:

讬讜爪专 讗讜专 讜讘讜专讗 讞砖讱

鈥淲ho forms light and creates darkness, Who makes peace and creates evil, I am the Lord Who does all these things鈥 (Isaiah 45:7).

诇讬诪讗 讬讜爪专 讗讜专 讜讘讜专讗 谞讜讙讛

With regard to this formula of the blessing, the Gemara asks: Let him say the following formula instead: Who forms light and creates brightness, so as not to mention darkness, which has negative connotations.

讻讚讻转讬讘 拽讗诪专讬谞谉

The Gemara answers: We say the blessing as the verse is written in the Bible and do not alter the formula that appears in the verse.

讗诇讗 诪注转讛 注砖讛 砖诇讜诐 讜讘讜专讗 专注 诪讬 拽讗 讗诪专讬谞谉 讻讚讻转讬讘 讗诇讗 讻转讬讘 专注 讜拽专讬谞谉 讛讻诇 诇讬砖谞讗 诪注诇讬讗 讛讻讗 谞诪讬 诇讬诪讗 谞讜讙讛 诇讬砖谞讗 诪注诇讬讗

The Gemara strongly objects: But if so, what about the continuation of the verse: 鈥淲ho makes peace and creates evil鈥? Do we say this blessing as it is written in the Bible? Rather, it is written evil and we euphemistically recite the blessing all things to avoid mention of evil. Here, too, let us euphemistically say brightness instead of darkness.

讗诇讗 讗诪专 专讘讗 讻讚讬 诇讛讝讻讬专 诪讚转 讬讜诐 讘诇讬诇讛 讜诪讚转 诇讬诇讛 讘讬讜诐

Rather, Rava said: The reason we recite: 鈥淲ho creates darkness鈥 is in order to mention the attribute of day at night and the attribute of night during the day, and thereby unify day and night as different parts of a single entity.

讘砖诇诪讗 诪讚转 诇讬诇讛 讘讬讜诐 讻讚讗诪专讬谞谉 讬讜爪专 讗讜专 讜讘讜专讗 讞砖讱 讗诇讗 诪讚转 讬讜诐 讘诇讬诇讛 讛讬讻讬 诪砖讻讞转 诇讛

The Gemara continues and asks: Granted, the attribute of night is mentioned during the day, as we say: Who forms light and creates darkness, but where do you find the attribute of day mentioned at night? In the blessing over the radiant lights recited at night there is no mention of 鈥淲ho forms light.鈥

讗诪专 讗讘讬讬 讙讜诇诇 讗讜专 诪驻谞讬 讞砖讱 讜讞砖讱 诪驻谞讬 讗讜专

Abaye said: Nevertheless, the attribute of day is mentioned at night in the words: Rolling away light before the darkness and darkness before the light.

讜讗讬讚讱 诪讗讬 讛讬讗 讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 砖诪讜讗诇 讗讛讘讛 专讘讛 讜讻谉 讗讜专讬 诇讬讛 专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 诇专讘讬 驻讚转 讘专讬讛 讗讛讘讛 专讘讛

The Gemara asks: And what is the formula of the other blessing recited before Shema? Rav Yehuda said in the name of Shmuel: An abounding love [ahava rabba]. And Rabbi Elazar instructed his son, Rabbi Pedat, to also say: An abounding love.

转谞讬讗 谞诪讬 讛讻讬 讗讬谉 讗讜诪专讬诐 讗讛讘转 注讜诇诐 讗诇讗 讗讛讘讛 专讘讛 讜专讘谞谉 讗诪专讬 讗讛讘转 注讜诇诐 讜讻谉 讛讜讗 讗讜诪专 讜讗讛讘转 注讜诇诐 讗讛讘转讬讱 注诇 讻谉 诪砖讻转讬讱 讞住讚

That was also taught in a baraita: One does not recite: An eternal love [ahavat olam]; rather, one recites: An abounding love. And the Rabbis say that one recites: An eternal love, and so it says: 鈥淎nd an eternal love I have loved you, therefore I have drawn you with kindness鈥 (Jeremiah 31:2).

讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 砖诪讜讗诇 讛砖讻讬诐 诇砖谞讜转 注讚 砖诇讗 拽专讗 拽专讬讗转 砖诪注 爪专讬讱 诇讘专讱 诪砖拽专讗 拽专讬讗转 砖诪注 讗讬谞讜 爪专讬讱 诇讘专讱 砖讻讘专 谞驻讟专 讘讗讛讘讛 专讘讛

The blessing: An abounding love, is about God鈥檚 love for us and includes praise for His giving us the Torah. Therefore, Rav Yehuda said that Shmuel said: One who arose to study, until he recites Shema he must recite a special blessing over the Torah. If he already recited Shema he need not recite that blessing, as he has exempted himself by reciting the blessing of: An abounding love, which includes the components of the blessing over the Torah.

讗诪专 专讘 讛讜谞讗 诇诪拽专讗 爪专讬讱 诇讘专讱 讜诇诪讚专砖 讗讬谞讜 爪专讬讱 诇讘专讱

Having mentioned the blessing recited over Torah, the Gemara focuses on a dispute over what constitutes Torah in terms of requiring a blessing. Rav Huna said: For the study of Bible, one must recite a blessing, as it is the word of God, and for halakhic midrash, the derivation of halakhot from verses, one need not recite a blessing.

讜专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 讗诪专 诇诪拽专讗 讜诇诪讚专砖 爪专讬讱 诇讘专讱 诇诪砖谞讛 讗讬谞讜 爪专讬讱 诇讘专讱

And Rabbi Elazar said: For Bible and midrash, which includes halakhot derived from verses themselves, one must recite a blessing; for Mishna, which is only comprised of halakhic rulings issued by the Sages, one need not recite a blessing.

讜专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讗诪专 讗祝 诇诪砖谞讛 谞诪讬 爪专讬讱 诇讘专讱 [讗讘诇 诇转诇诪讜讚 讗讬谞讜 爪专讬讱 诇讘专讱]

And Rabbi Yo岣nan said: Even for Mishna, which includes final, binding halakhic rulings, one must recite a blessing as well, but for Talmud, which comprises a study of the Mishna and the rationales for its rulings, one need not recite a blessing.

讜专讘讗 讗诪专 讗祝 诇转诇诪讜讚 爪专讬讱 (诇讞讝讜专 讜诇讘专讱) [诇讘专讱]

And Rava said: Even for Talmud, which is the means to analyze the significance of the halakhot, and is the only form of Torah study that leads one to its true meaning, one must recite a blessing.

讚讗诪专 专讘 讞讬讬讗 讘专 讗砖讬 讝讬诪谞讬谉 住讙讬讗讬谉 讛讜讛 拽讗讬诪谞讗 拽诪讬讛 讚专讘 诇转谞讜讬讬 驻专拽讬谉 讘住驻专讗 讚讘讬 专讘 讛讜讛 诪拽讚讬诐 讜拽讗 诪砖讬 讬讚讬讛 讜讘专讬讱 讜诪转谞讬 诇谉 驻专拽讬谉

This statement is supported by the practical halakha derived from observation of Rav鈥檚 practice. His student, Rav 岣yya bar Ashi, said: Many times I stood before Rav to study our chapter in the Sifra, also known as Torat Kohanim, the halakhic midrash on Leviticus, of the school of Rav, and I saw that Rav would first wash his hands, then recite a blessing, and only then he would teach us our chapter. This demonstrates that even before their study of Torat Kohanim, which, due to Rav鈥檚 explanation of the reasons behind the halakhot, was the equivalent of studying Talmud, one must recite a blessing.

诪讗讬 诪讘专讱 讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 砖诪讜讗诇 讗砖专 拽讚砖谞讜 讘诪爪讜转讬讜 讜爪讜谞讜 诇注住讜拽 讘讚讘专讬 转讜专讛

The Gemara clarifies: What formula of blessings does he recite? There is a dispute over the formula of the blessings as well. Rav Yehuda said that Shmuel said: The formula of this blessing is like the standard formula for blessings recited over other mitzvot: Blessed are You, Lord our God, King of the universe, Who sanctified us with his mitzvot and commanded us to engage in matters of Torah.

讜专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 诪住讬讬诐 讘讛 讛讻讬 讛注专讘 谞讗 讛壮 讗诇讛讬谞讜 讗转 讚讘专讬 转讜专转讱 讘驻讬谞讜 讜讘驻讬驻讬讜转 注诪讱 讘讬转 讬砖专讗诇 讜谞讛讬讛 讗谞讞谞讜 讜爪讗爪讗讬谞讜 讜爪讗爪讗讬 注诪讱 讘讬转 讬砖专讗诇 讻诇谞讜 讬讜讚注讬 砖诪讱 讜注讜住拽讬 转讜专转讱 讘专讜讱 讗转讛 讛壮 讛诪诇诪讚 转讜专讛 诇注诪讜 讬砖专讗诇

And Rabbi Yo岣nan concludes the blessing by adding the following: Lord our God, make the words of Your Torah sweet in our mouths and in the mouths of Your people, the house of Israel, so that we and our descendants and the descendants of Your people, the house of Israel, may be those who know Your name and engage in Your Torah. Blessed are You, Lord, Who teaches Torah to His people Israel.

讜专讘 讛诪谞讜谞讗 讗诪专 讗砖专 讘讞专 讘谞讜 诪讻诇 讛注诪讬诐 讜谞转谉 诇谞讜 讗转 转讜专转讜 讘专讜讱 讗转讛 讛壮 谞讜转谉 讛转讜专讛 讗诪专 专讘 讛诪谞讜谞讗 讝讜 讛讬讗 诪注讜诇讛 砖讘讘专讻讜转

And Rav Hamnuna said an additional formula: Who has chosen us from all the peoples and given us His Torah. Blessed are You, Lord, Giver of the Torah. With regard to this formula, Rav Hamnuna said: This concise blessing is the most outstanding of all the blessings over the Torah, as it combines thanks to God for giving us the Torah as well as acclaim for the Torah and for Israel.

讛诇讻讱 诇讬诪专讬谞讛讜 诇讻讜诇讛讜:

Since several formulas for the blessing over Torah were suggested, each with its own distinct advantage, the Gemara concludes: Therefore, let us recite them all as blessings over the Torah.

转谞谉 讛转诐 讗诪专 诇讛诐 讛诪诪讜谞讛 讘专讻讜 讘专讻讛 讗讞转 讜讛诐 讘专讻讜 讜拽专讗讜 注砖专转 讛讚讘专讜转 砖诪注 讜讛讬讛 讗诐 砖诪讜注 讜讬讗诪专 讜讘专讻讜 讗转 讛注诐 砖诇砖 讘专讻讜转 讗诪转 讜讬爪讬讘 讜注讘讜讚讛 讜讘专讻转 讻讛谞讬诐 讜讘砖讘转 诪讜住讬驻讬谉 讘专讻讛 讗讞转 诇诪砖诪专 讛讬讜爪讗

The Gemara returns to dealing with the blessings that accompany Shema, and describes the practice in the Temple. We learned there, in a mishna in tractate Tamid: In the morning the deputy High Priest appointed to oversee activity in the Temple, said to the priests who were members of the priestly watch [mishmar] on duty that week: Recite a single blessing. The members of the priestly watch recited a blessing, and read the Ten Commandments, Shema, VeHaya im Shamoa and VaYomer, the standard recitation of Shema. Additionally, they blessed the people with three blessings. These blessings were: True and Firm, the blessing of redemption recited after Shema; Avoda, service, the special blessing recited over God鈥檚 acceptance of the sacrifices with favor, similar to the blessing of Temple Service recited in the Amida prayer; and the priestly benediction, recited in the form of a prayer without the outstretched hands that usually accompany that blessing (Tosafot). And on Shabbat one blessing is added to bless the outgoing priestly watch, as the watch serving in the Temple was replaced on Shabbat.

诪讗讬 讘专讻讛 讗讞转 讻讬 讛讗 讚专讘讬 讗讘讗 讜专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讘专 讗讘讗 讗拽诇注讜 诇讛讛讜讗 讗转专讗 讘注讜 诪谞讬讬讛讜 诪讗讬 讘专讻讛 讗讞转 诇讗 讛讜讛 讘讬讚讬讬讛讜 讜讗转讜 砖讬讬诇讜讛讜 诇专讘 诪转谞讛 诇讗 讛讜讛 讘讬讚讬讛 讗转讜 砖讬讬诇讜讛讜 诇专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 诇讛讜 讛讻讬 讗诪专 砖诪讜讗诇 讗讛讘讛 专讘讛

Certain details in this mishna are not sufficiently clear. First, what is the single blessing that the deputy High Priest instructed the guards to recite? The Gemara relates: It is like the incident where Rabbi Abba and Rabbi Yosei bar Abba happened to visit a certain unnamed place, and the people there asked them: What is the single blessing mentioned in the mishna? They did not have an answer readily available. So they came and asked Rav Mattana, and he too did not have an answer readily available. They came and asked Rav Yehuda, and he told them: Shmuel said as follows: An abounding love is the single blessing recited by the priestly watch.

讜讗诪专 专讘讬 讝专讬拽讗 讗诪专 专讘讬 讗诪讬 讗诪专 专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 诇拽讬砖 讬讜爪专 讗讜专 讻讬 讗转讗 专讘 讬爪讞拽 讘专 讬讜住祝 讗诪专 讛讗 讚专讘讬 讝专讬拽讗 诇讗讜 讘驻讬专讜砖 讗转诪专 讗诇讗 诪讻诇诇讗 讗转诪专 讚讗诪专 专讘讬 讝专讬拽讗 讗诪专 专讘讬 讗诪讬 讗诪专 专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 诇拽讬砖 讝讗转 讗讜诪专转 讘专讻讜转 讗讬谉 诪注讻讘讜转 讝讜 讗转 讝讜

Rabbi Zerika said that Rabbi Ami said that Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish said a different answer: This single blessing is: Who creates light. That was how Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish鈥檚 statement was received in Babylonia, yet when Rav Yitz岣k bar Yosef came from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia, he said that this halakha was not a direct quote of a statement by Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish. That which Rabbi Zerika said was not stated explicitly by Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish, but rather it was inferred from another statement. As Rabbi Zerika said that Rabbi Ami said that Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish said: From the expression: Recite a single blessing, in the mishna in tractate Tamid, it follows that failure to recite one of the blessings recited before Shema does not prevent one from reciting the other. This means that if only one of the blessings was recited, the obligation to recite that blessing was fulfilled, as the two blessings are not mutually dependent.

讗讬 讗诪专转 讘砖诇诪讗 讬讜爪专 讗讜专 讛讜讜 讗诪专讬 讛讬讬谞讜 讚讘专讻讜转 讗讬谉 诪注讻讘讜转 讝讜 讗转 讝讜 讚诇讗 拽讗 讗诪专讬 讗讛讘讛 专讘讛

The conclusion was drawn from Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish鈥檚 statement that he held that the single blessing recited was: Who creates light. The considerations that led the Sages to that conclusion were: Granted, if you say that they would recite: Who creates light, then the conclusion of Reish Lakish, that failure to recite one of the blessings recited before Shema does not prevent one from reciting the other, is understandable, as they recited: Who creates light, and did not recite: An abounding love, and they nonetheless fulfilled their obligation.

  • This month's learning is sponsored by the Kessler, Wolkenfeld and Grossman families in loving memory of Mia Rose bat Matan Yehoshua v鈥 Elana Malka. "讛 谞转谉 讜讛 诇拽讞. 讬讛讬 砖诐 讛 诪讘讜专讱"

  • This month's shiurim are sponsored by Shoshana Shur for the refuah shleima of Meira Bat Zelda Zahava.

Want to explore more about the Daf?

See insights from our partners, contributors and community of women learners

daf_icon

Extempore Effusions on the Completion of Masechet Berakhot (chapters 1-3)

PEREK ALEPH: (2a) When may we say Shma at night? From the time the priests take their first bite 鈥楾il...

Berakhot 11

The William Davidson Talmud | Powered by Sefaria

Berakhot 11

讙诪壮 讘砖诇诪讗 讘讬转 讛诇诇 拽讗 诪驻专砖讬 讟注诪讬讬讛讜 讜讟注诪讗 讚讘讬转 砖诪讗讬 讗诇讗 讘讬转 砖诪讗讬 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 诇讗 讗诪专讬 讻讘讬转 讛诇诇

GEMARA: The Gemara begins by clarifying the rationale for Beit Shammai鈥檚 opinion. Granted, Beit Hillel explain the rationale for their opinion and the rationale for Beit Shammai鈥檚 opinion. Beit Hillel explain both the verse that ostensibly supports Beit Shammai鈥檚 opinion: When you lie down, at the time when people lie down, etc., and the verse that proves that their own explanation is more reasonable: 鈥淎nd when you walk along the way.鈥 However, what is the reason that Beit Shammai do not state their opinion in accordance with the opinion of Beit Hillel?

讗诪专讬 诇讱 讘讬转 砖诪讗讬 讗诐 讻谉 谞讬诪讗 拽专讗 讘讘拽专 讜讘注专讘 诪讗讬 讘砖讻讘讱 讜讘拽讜诪讱 讘砖注转 砖讻讬讘讛 砖讻讬讘讛 诪诪砖 讜讘砖注转 拽讬诪讛 拽讬诪讛 诪诪砖

The Gemara answers, Beit Shammai could have said to you: If so that the verse means only to denote the time for the recitation of Shema, as claimed by Beit Hillel, then let the verse say: 鈥淚n the morning and in the evening.鈥 What is the meaning of the ambiguous formulation: 鈥淲hen you lie down, and when you rise鈥? It must mean that at the time of lying down one must recite Shema while actually lying down, and at the time of arising one must recite Shema while actually risen.

讜讘讬转 砖诪讗讬 讛讗讬 讜讘诇讻转讱 讘讚专讱 诪讗讬 注讘讬讚 诇讛讜

The Gemara continues, asking: And what do Beit Shammai do with this verse: 鈥淎nd when you walk along the way,鈥 which Beit Hillel use to prove that every person recites Shema as he is?

讛讛讜讗 诪讘注讬 诇讛讜 诇讻讚转谞讬讗 讘砖讘转讱 讘讘讬转讱 驻专讟 诇注讜住拽 讘诪爪讜讛 讜讘诇讻转讱 讘讚专讱 驻专讟 诇讞转谉 诪讻讗谉 讗诪专讜 讛讻讜谞住 讗转 讛讘转讜诇讛 驻讟讜专 讜讗转 讛讗诇诪谞讛 讞讬讬讘

The Gemara answers: Beit Shammai need this verse in order to derive other halakhot, as it was taught in a baraita which interpreted this verse that the obligation to recite Shema applies when you sit in your home, to the exclusion of one who is engaged in performance of a mitzva, who is exempt from the recitation of Shema; and when you walk along the way, to the exclusion of a groom, who is also exempt from the recitation of Shema. The baraita adds that from here, from this interpretation of the verses, they said: One who marries a virgin is exempt from the recitation of Shema on his wedding night, but one who marries a widow is obligated.

诪讗讬 诪砖诪注

The Gemara clarifies the meaning of this baraita, and asks: From where may it be inferred that the verse, when you walk along the way, exempts a groom from the obligation to recite Shema?

讗诪专 专讘 驻驻讗 讻讬 讚专讱 诪讛 讚专讱 专砖讜转 讗祝 讻诇 专砖讜转

Rav Pappa said that we learn: Like the way; just as the journey along a specific way described in the verse is voluntary and involves no mitzva, so too all of those who are obligated to recite Shema are engaged in voluntary activities. However, one engaged in the performance of a mitzva, like a groom, is exempt from the obligation to recite Shema.

诪讬 诇讗 注住拽讬谞谉 讚拽讗 讗讝讬诇 诇讚讘专 诪爪讜讛 讜讗驻讬诇讜 讛讻讬 讗诪专 专讞诪谞讗 诇拽专讬 讗诐 讻谉 诇讻转讜讘 专讞诪谞讗 讘砖讘转 讜讘诇讻转 诪讗讬 讘砖讘转讱 讜讘诇讻转讱 讘砖讘转 讚讬讚讱 讜讘诇讻转 讚讬讚讱 讛讜讗 讚诪讞讬讬讘转 讛讗 讚诪爪讜讛 驻讟讬专转

The Gemara asks: Are we not dealing with a case where one walks along the way to perform a mitzva? The Torah did not designate the objective of his walk and, nevertheless, the Torah said to recite Shema, indicating that one is obligated even if he set out to perform a mitzva. Rather, the proof is from the formulation of the verse. If so, that the intention was to obligate in all cases, let the Torah write: When sitting and when walking. What is the meaning of: When you sit and when you walk? Certainly these additions come to emphasize in your sitting down and in your walking, meaning that when one does this for his own purposes and of his own volition, he is obligated to recite Shema, but when he does with the objective of performing a mitzva, he is exempt from reciting Shema, as in that case he is sitting or walking at God鈥檚 behest.

讗讬 讛讻讬 讗驻讬诇讜 讻讜谞住 讗转 讛讗诇诪谞讛 谞诪讬

The conclusion is that anyone engaged in the performance of a mitzva is exempt from the recitation of Shema. If so, even one who marries a widow should be exempt, for he, too, is engaged in performance of a mitzva. That, however, contradicts the baraita.

讛讗讬 讟专讬讚 讜讛讗讬 诇讗 讟专讬讚

The Gemara responds that there is nevertheless a distinction between one marrying a virgin and one marrying a widow. One who marries a virgin is preoccupied by his concern lest he discover that his bride is not a virgin, while one who marries a widow is not preoccupied. The conclusion is that the groom is exempt from reciting Shema because he is preoccupied.

讗讬 诪砖讜诐 讟专讚讗 讗驻讬诇讜 讟讘注讛 住驻讬谞转讜 讘讬诐 谞诪讬 讜讻讬 转讬诪讗 讛讻讬 谞诪讬 讗诇诪讛 讗诪专 专讘讬 讗讘讗 讘专 讝讘讚讗 讗诪专 专讘 讗讘诇 讞讬讬讘 讘讻诇 讛诪爪讜转 讛讗诪讜专讜转 讘转讜专讛 讞讜抓 诪谉 讛转驻讬诇讬谉 砖讛专讬 谞讗诪专 讘讛诐 驻讗专 砖谞讗诪专 驻讗专讱 讞讘讜砖 注诇讬讱

The Gemara asks: If the exemption is due to preoccupation, then even one who is preoccupied because his ship sank at sea should also be exempt. The Gemara reinforces its question: And if you say that in this case as well, when one鈥檚 ship sank at sea, one is exempt, why then did Rabbi Abba bar Zavda say that Rav said: A mourner is obligated in all the mitzvot mentioned in the Torah except for the mitzva to don phylacteries, from which a mourner is exempt, as the term splendor is stated with regard to phylacteries, as it is stated: 鈥淢ake no mourning for the dead, bind your splendor upon yourself鈥 (Ezekiel 24:17). It is inappropriate for a mourner to wrap himself in phylacteries, with regard to which, the term splendor was employed (Tosafot). If a mourner, who is clearly pained and preoccupied, is obligated to recite Shema, then certainly all others who are preoccupied, even one whose ship sank at sea, whose loss was merely monetary (Birkat Hashem), should be obligated. Why, then, is a groom exempted because of his preoccupation and one who lost his property is not?

讛转诐 讟专讬讚 讟专讚讗 讚诪爪讜讛 讛讻讗 讟专讬讚 讟专讚讗 讚专砖讜转

The Gemara answers: Nevertheless, there is a distinction between the cases. For there, in the case of a groom, he is preoccupied with the preoccupation of a mitzva that he must perform; here, in the case of a ship lost at sea, he is preoccupied with the preoccupation of a voluntary act that he chooses to perform.

讜讘讬转 砖诪讗讬

Here, the Gemara returns to its initial question: And how do Beit Shammai explain the passage: 鈥淲hen you walk along the way鈥 (Rashash)?

讛讛讜讗 诪讘注讬 诇讛讜 驻专讟 诇砖诇讜讞讬 诪爪讜讛

The Gemara answers: Beit Shammai need this passage in order to exclude one who is on the path to perform a mitzva from the obligation to recite Shema.

讜讘讬转 讛诇诇 讗诪专讬 诪诪讬诇讗 砖诪注 诪讬谞讛 讚讗驻讬诇讜 讘讚专讱 谞诪讬 拽专讬:

Beit Hillel also agree that one engaged in the performance of a mitzva is exempt from reciting Shema? If so, the halakha that they derived from: When you walk along the way lacks a source and is therefore unfounded. And Beit Hillel say: Derive from this halakha itself that one who is not an agent in the performance of a mitzva recites Shema even along the way.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讘讬转 讛诇诇 讗讜诪专讬诐 注讜诪讚讬谉 讜拽讜专讬谉 讬讜砖讘讬谉 讜拽讜专讬谉 讜诪讟讬谉 讜拽讜专讬谉 讛讜诇讻讬谉 讘讚专讱 讜拽讜专讬谉 注讜砖讬谉 讘诪诇讗讻转谉 讜拽讜专讬谉 讜诪注砖讛 讘专讘讬 讬砖诪注讗诇 讜专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 讘谉 注讝专讬讛 砖讛讬讜 诪住讜讘讬谉 讘诪拽讜诐 讗讞讚 讜讛讬讛 专讘讬 讬砖诪注讗诇 诪讜讟讛 讜专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 讘谉 注讝专讬讛 讝拽讜祝 讻讬讜谉 砖讛讙讬注 讝诪谉 拽专讬讗转 砖诪注 讛讟讛 专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 讜讝拽祝 专讘讬 讬砖诪注讗诇 讗诪专 诇讜 专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 讘谉 注讝专讬讛 诇专讘讬 讬砖诪注讗诇 讬砖诪注讗诇 讗讞讬 讗诪砖讜诇 诇讱 诪砖诇 诇诪讛 讛讚讘专 讚讜诪讛 诪砖诇 诇讗讞讚 砖讗讜诪专讬诐 诇讜 讝拽谞讱 诪讙讜讚诇 讗诪专 诇讛诐 讬讛讬讛 讻谞讙讚 讛诪砖讞讬转讬诐 讗祝 讻讱 讗转讛 讻诇 讝诪谉 砖讗谞讬 讝拽讜祝 讗转讛 诪讜讟讛 注讻砖讬讜 讻砖讗谞讬 讛讟转讬 讗转讛 讝拽驻转

The Sages taught in a baraita that Beit Hillel say: One may recite Shema in any situation: Standing and reciting, sitting and reciting, reclining and reciting, walking and reciting and even working and reciting. And in the Tosefta an incident is related where two tanna鈥檌m, Rabbi Yishmael and Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya, who were both disciples of Beit Hillel, were reclining at a meal in one place together with their students, and Rabbi Yishmael was reclined as was the customary dining position, and Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya was upright. When the time to recite the evening Shema arrived, Rabbi Elazar reclined to recite Shema in accordance with the opinion of Beit Shammai, while Rabbi Yishmael sat upright to recite Shema. Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya appeared to take offense, and said to Rabbi Yishmael: Yishmael, my brother, I will tell you a parable to which this is similar. It is comparable to a situation where one to whom people say as a compliment: Your beard is full and suits you. That man says to them: May it be against those who shave and destroy their beards, i.e., the only reason I grow my beard is to irritate those who cut their own (Rashba). You are the same. As long as I am upright, you are reclined, and now when I reclined lauding your conduct and emulating you, you sat upright as if to demonstrate that whatever I do, you do the opposite.

讗诪专 诇讜 讗谞讬 注砖讬转讬 讻讚讘专讬 讘讬转 讛诇诇 讜讗转讛 注砖讬转 讻讚讘专讬 讘讬转 砖诪讗讬 讜诇讗 注讜讚 讗诇讗 砖诪讗 讬专讗讜 讛转诇诪讬讚讬诐 讜讬拽讘注讜 讛诇讻讛 诇讚讜专讜转

Rabbi Yishmael said to him: I acted in accordance with the opinion of Beit Hillel, according to whom one may recite Shema in any position, while you acted in accordance with the opinion of Beit Shammai. I am the one who acted in accordance with the halakha. And furthermore, I was concerned lest the students see your conduct and establish the halakha for generations accordingly. It was therefore necessary for me to demonstrate that there is no obligation to do so.

诪讗讬 讜诇讗 注讜讚

The Gemara asks: What is the meaning of: And furthermore? Why was it necessary for Rabbi Yishmael to add additional justification for his actions when the reason that he acted in accordance with the opinion of Beit Hillel was sufficient?

讜讻讬 转讬诪讗 讘讬转 讛诇诇 谞诪讬 讗讬转 诇讛讜 诪讟讬谉 讛谞讬 诪讬诇讬 讚诪讟讛 讜讗转讗 诪注讬拽专讗 讗讘诇 讛讻讗 讻讬讜谉 讚注讚 讛砖转讗 讛讜讬转 讝拽讜祝 讜讛砖转讗 诪讜讟讛 讗诪专讬 砖诪注 诪讬谞讛 讻讘讬转 砖诪讗讬 住讘讬专讗 诇讛讜 砖诪讗 讬专讗讜 讛转诇诪讬讚讬诐 讜讬拽讘注讜 讛诇讻讛 诇讚讜专讜转

The Gemara answers: It was necessary for him to add this reason, as if you say: Beit Hillel also hold that one is permitted to recite Shema while reclining and Rabbi Yishmael could have remained reclining even in accordance with the opinion of Beit Hillel, but this only applies when one had already been reclining originally, in which case it is like any other position. However, here, since until now he had been upright, and now he is reclined, the students will say: Conclude from this, that they hold in accordance with the opinion of Beit Shammai. Due to the concern that the students might see and establish the halakha for generations in accordance with the opinion of Beit Shammai, it was necessary for Rabbi Yishmael to sit upright.

转谞讬 专讘 讬讞讝拽讗诇 注砖讛 讻讚讘专讬 讘讬转 砖诪讗讬 注砖讛 讻讚讘专讬 讘讬转 讛诇诇 注砖讛

Rav Ye岣zkel taught: One who acted in accordance with the opinion of Beit Shammai has acted appropriately and is not in violation of the halakha. One who acted in accordance with the opinion of Beit Hillel acted appropriately as well. According to this opinion, Beit Hillel and Beit Shammai agree that one who acted in accordance with the opinion of the other fulfilled his obligation. Although the halakha was ruled in accordance with the opinion of Beit Hillel, Beit Hillel would agree that one who acted in accordance with the opinion of Beit Shammai fulfilled his obligation.

专讘 讬讜住祝 讗诪专 注砖讛 讻讚讘专讬 讘讬转 砖诪讗讬 诇讗 注砖讛 讜诇讗 讻诇讜诐 讚转谞谉 诪讬 砖讛讬讛 专讗砖讜 讜专讜讘讜 讘住讜讻讛 讜砖诇讞谞讜 讘转讜讱 讛讘讬转 讘讬转 砖诪讗讬 驻讜住诇讬谉 讜讘讬转 讛诇诇 诪讻砖讬专讬谉

However, Rav Yosef said: One who acts in accordance with the opinion of Beit Shammai has done nothing and must repeat Shema in accordance with the opinion of Beit Hillel, as we learned in the mishna with regard to the halakhot of a sukka: One who had his head and most of his body in the sukka, and his table upon which he was eating inside the house, Beit Shammai invalidate his action, as he is liable to be drawn after the table and end up eating outside the sukka. And Beit Hillel validate his action, since his head and most of his body remain inside the sukka.

讗诪专讜 诇讛诐 讘讬转 讛诇诇 诇讘讬转 砖诪讗讬 诪注砖讛 砖讛诇讻讜 讝拽谞讬 讘讬转 砖诪讗讬 讜讝拽谞讬 讘讬转 讛诇诇 诇讘拽专 讗转 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讘谉 讛讞讜专谞讬转 诪爪讗讜讛讜 砖讛讬讛 专讗砖讜 讜专讜讘讜 讘住讜讻讛 讜砖诇讞谞讜 讘转讜讱 讛讘讬转 讜诇讗 讗诪专讜 诇讜 讻诇讜诐

Beit Hillel said to Beit Shammai as a proof: There was an incident where the elders of Beit Shammai and the elders of Beit Hillel went on Sukkot to visit Rabbi Yo岣nan ben Ha岣ranit. They found him with his head and most of his body in the sukka and his table inside the house and they said nothing to him. In other words, even Beit Shammai did not object.

讗诪专讜 诇讛诐 讜诪砖诐 专讗讬讛 讗祝 讛诐 讗诪专讜 诇讜 讗诐 讻谉 讛讬讬转 谞讜讛讙 诇讗 拽讬讬诪转 诪爪讜转 住讜讻讛 诪讬诪讬讱

Beit Shammai said to them: And is there proof from there? That is not what happened, rather they said to him explicitly: If you have been accustomed to act in this manner, you have never in your life fulfilled the mitzva of sukka. We see that Beit Shammai held that anyone who did not act in accordance with their opinion, did not fulfill his obligation at all. Similarly, since Beit Hillel鈥檚 opinion was accepted as halakha, anyone who acts in accordance with the opinion of Beit Shammai fails to fulfill his obligation.

专讘 谞讞诪谉 讘专 讬爪讞拽 讗诪专 注砖讛 讻讚讘专讬 讘讬转 砖诪讗讬 讞讬讬讘 诪讬转讛 讚转谞谉 讗诪专 专讘讬 讟专驻讜谉 讗谞讬 讛讬讬转讬 讘讗 讘讚专讱 讜讛讟转讬 诇拽专讜转 讻讚讘专讬 讘讬转 砖诪讗讬 讜住讻谞转讬 讘注爪诪讬 诪驻谞讬 讛诇住讟讬诐 讗诪专讜 诇讜 讻讚讗讬 讛讬讬转 诇讞讜讘 讘注爪诪讱 砖注讘专转 注诇 讚讘专讬 讘讬转 讛诇诇:

Rav Na岣an bar Yitz岣k stated an even more extreme opinion: One who acted in accordance with the opinion of Beit Shammai has acted so egregiously that he is liable to receive the death penalty, as we learned in our mishna that Rabbi Tarfon said to his colleagues: Once, I was coming on the road when I stopped and reclined to recite Shema in accordance with the statement of Beit Shammai. Yet in so doing, I endangered myself due to the highwaymen who accost travelers. The Sages said to him: You deserved to be in a position where you were liable to pay with your life, as you transgressed the statement of Beit Hillel.

诪转谞讬壮 讘砖讞专 诪讘专讱 砖转讬诐 诇驻谞讬讛 讜讗讞转 诇讗讞专讬讛 讜讘注专讘 诪讘专讱 砖转讬诐 诇驻谞讬讛 讜砖转讬诐 诇讗讞专讬讛 讗讞转 讗专讜讻讛 讜讗讞转 拽爪专讛

MISHNA: From the laws of the recitation of Shema itself, the mishna proceeds to discuss the blessings recited in conjunction with Shema. Here, the order is established: In the morning when reciting Shema, one recites two blessings beforehand, the first on the radiant lights and the second the blessing on the love of Torah, and one thereafter, which begins with: True and Firm [emet veyatziv]. And in the evening one recites two blessings beforehand, on the radiant lights and on the love of God, and two thereafter, the blessing of redemption: True and Faithful [emet ve鈥檈muna], and the blessing: Help us lie down. With regard to the blessing: True and Faithful, whether one recites it in its long formula and whether one recites it in its short formula, he fulfills his obligation (Tosafot).

诪拽讜诐 砖讗诪专讜 诇讛讗专讬讱 讗讬谞讜 专砖讗讬 诇拽爪专 诇拽爪专 讗讬谞讜 专砖讗讬 诇讛讗专讬讱 诇讞转讜诐 讗讬谞讜 专砖讗讬 砖诇讗 诇讞转讜诐 砖诇讗 诇讞转讜诐 讗讬谞讜 专砖讗讬 诇讞转讜诐:

However, the general principle is: Where the Sages said to recite a long blessing, one may not shorten it, and so too, wherever they said to recite a short blessing, one may not lengthen it. Where the Sages said that a blessing must conclude with a second blessing at the end, he may not fail to conclude with that blessing. Similarly, if the Sages said that a blessing must not conclude with a second blessing, one may not conclude with a blessing.

讙诪壮 诪讗讬 诪讘专讱

GEMARA: The Gemara begins by determining the formula of the two blessings preceding the morning Shema. The Gemara asks: What blessing does one recite?

讗诪专 专讘讬 讬注拽讘 讗诪专 专讘讬 讗讜砖注讬讗

Rabbi Ya鈥檃kov said in the name of Rabbi Oshaya: The blessing focuses on the verse:

讬讜爪专 讗讜专 讜讘讜专讗 讞砖讱

鈥淲ho forms light and creates darkness, Who makes peace and creates evil, I am the Lord Who does all these things鈥 (Isaiah 45:7).

诇讬诪讗 讬讜爪专 讗讜专 讜讘讜专讗 谞讜讙讛

With regard to this formula of the blessing, the Gemara asks: Let him say the following formula instead: Who forms light and creates brightness, so as not to mention darkness, which has negative connotations.

讻讚讻转讬讘 拽讗诪专讬谞谉

The Gemara answers: We say the blessing as the verse is written in the Bible and do not alter the formula that appears in the verse.

讗诇讗 诪注转讛 注砖讛 砖诇讜诐 讜讘讜专讗 专注 诪讬 拽讗 讗诪专讬谞谉 讻讚讻转讬讘 讗诇讗 讻转讬讘 专注 讜拽专讬谞谉 讛讻诇 诇讬砖谞讗 诪注诇讬讗 讛讻讗 谞诪讬 诇讬诪讗 谞讜讙讛 诇讬砖谞讗 诪注诇讬讗

The Gemara strongly objects: But if so, what about the continuation of the verse: 鈥淲ho makes peace and creates evil鈥? Do we say this blessing as it is written in the Bible? Rather, it is written evil and we euphemistically recite the blessing all things to avoid mention of evil. Here, too, let us euphemistically say brightness instead of darkness.

讗诇讗 讗诪专 专讘讗 讻讚讬 诇讛讝讻讬专 诪讚转 讬讜诐 讘诇讬诇讛 讜诪讚转 诇讬诇讛 讘讬讜诐

Rather, Rava said: The reason we recite: 鈥淲ho creates darkness鈥 is in order to mention the attribute of day at night and the attribute of night during the day, and thereby unify day and night as different parts of a single entity.

讘砖诇诪讗 诪讚转 诇讬诇讛 讘讬讜诐 讻讚讗诪专讬谞谉 讬讜爪专 讗讜专 讜讘讜专讗 讞砖讱 讗诇讗 诪讚转 讬讜诐 讘诇讬诇讛 讛讬讻讬 诪砖讻讞转 诇讛

The Gemara continues and asks: Granted, the attribute of night is mentioned during the day, as we say: Who forms light and creates darkness, but where do you find the attribute of day mentioned at night? In the blessing over the radiant lights recited at night there is no mention of 鈥淲ho forms light.鈥

讗诪专 讗讘讬讬 讙讜诇诇 讗讜专 诪驻谞讬 讞砖讱 讜讞砖讱 诪驻谞讬 讗讜专

Abaye said: Nevertheless, the attribute of day is mentioned at night in the words: Rolling away light before the darkness and darkness before the light.

讜讗讬讚讱 诪讗讬 讛讬讗 讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 砖诪讜讗诇 讗讛讘讛 专讘讛 讜讻谉 讗讜专讬 诇讬讛 专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 诇专讘讬 驻讚转 讘专讬讛 讗讛讘讛 专讘讛

The Gemara asks: And what is the formula of the other blessing recited before Shema? Rav Yehuda said in the name of Shmuel: An abounding love [ahava rabba]. And Rabbi Elazar instructed his son, Rabbi Pedat, to also say: An abounding love.

转谞讬讗 谞诪讬 讛讻讬 讗讬谉 讗讜诪专讬诐 讗讛讘转 注讜诇诐 讗诇讗 讗讛讘讛 专讘讛 讜专讘谞谉 讗诪专讬 讗讛讘转 注讜诇诐 讜讻谉 讛讜讗 讗讜诪专 讜讗讛讘转 注讜诇诐 讗讛讘转讬讱 注诇 讻谉 诪砖讻转讬讱 讞住讚

That was also taught in a baraita: One does not recite: An eternal love [ahavat olam]; rather, one recites: An abounding love. And the Rabbis say that one recites: An eternal love, and so it says: 鈥淎nd an eternal love I have loved you, therefore I have drawn you with kindness鈥 (Jeremiah 31:2).

讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 砖诪讜讗诇 讛砖讻讬诐 诇砖谞讜转 注讚 砖诇讗 拽专讗 拽专讬讗转 砖诪注 爪专讬讱 诇讘专讱 诪砖拽专讗 拽专讬讗转 砖诪注 讗讬谞讜 爪专讬讱 诇讘专讱 砖讻讘专 谞驻讟专 讘讗讛讘讛 专讘讛

The blessing: An abounding love, is about God鈥檚 love for us and includes praise for His giving us the Torah. Therefore, Rav Yehuda said that Shmuel said: One who arose to study, until he recites Shema he must recite a special blessing over the Torah. If he already recited Shema he need not recite that blessing, as he has exempted himself by reciting the blessing of: An abounding love, which includes the components of the blessing over the Torah.

讗诪专 专讘 讛讜谞讗 诇诪拽专讗 爪专讬讱 诇讘专讱 讜诇诪讚专砖 讗讬谞讜 爪专讬讱 诇讘专讱

Having mentioned the blessing recited over Torah, the Gemara focuses on a dispute over what constitutes Torah in terms of requiring a blessing. Rav Huna said: For the study of Bible, one must recite a blessing, as it is the word of God, and for halakhic midrash, the derivation of halakhot from verses, one need not recite a blessing.

讜专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 讗诪专 诇诪拽专讗 讜诇诪讚专砖 爪专讬讱 诇讘专讱 诇诪砖谞讛 讗讬谞讜 爪专讬讱 诇讘专讱

And Rabbi Elazar said: For Bible and midrash, which includes halakhot derived from verses themselves, one must recite a blessing; for Mishna, which is only comprised of halakhic rulings issued by the Sages, one need not recite a blessing.

讜专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讗诪专 讗祝 诇诪砖谞讛 谞诪讬 爪专讬讱 诇讘专讱 [讗讘诇 诇转诇诪讜讚 讗讬谞讜 爪专讬讱 诇讘专讱]

And Rabbi Yo岣nan said: Even for Mishna, which includes final, binding halakhic rulings, one must recite a blessing as well, but for Talmud, which comprises a study of the Mishna and the rationales for its rulings, one need not recite a blessing.

讜专讘讗 讗诪专 讗祝 诇转诇诪讜讚 爪专讬讱 (诇讞讝讜专 讜诇讘专讱) [诇讘专讱]

And Rava said: Even for Talmud, which is the means to analyze the significance of the halakhot, and is the only form of Torah study that leads one to its true meaning, one must recite a blessing.

讚讗诪专 专讘 讞讬讬讗 讘专 讗砖讬 讝讬诪谞讬谉 住讙讬讗讬谉 讛讜讛 拽讗讬诪谞讗 拽诪讬讛 讚专讘 诇转谞讜讬讬 驻专拽讬谉 讘住驻专讗 讚讘讬 专讘 讛讜讛 诪拽讚讬诐 讜拽讗 诪砖讬 讬讚讬讛 讜讘专讬讱 讜诪转谞讬 诇谉 驻专拽讬谉

This statement is supported by the practical halakha derived from observation of Rav鈥檚 practice. His student, Rav 岣yya bar Ashi, said: Many times I stood before Rav to study our chapter in the Sifra, also known as Torat Kohanim, the halakhic midrash on Leviticus, of the school of Rav, and I saw that Rav would first wash his hands, then recite a blessing, and only then he would teach us our chapter. This demonstrates that even before their study of Torat Kohanim, which, due to Rav鈥檚 explanation of the reasons behind the halakhot, was the equivalent of studying Talmud, one must recite a blessing.

诪讗讬 诪讘专讱 讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 砖诪讜讗诇 讗砖专 拽讚砖谞讜 讘诪爪讜转讬讜 讜爪讜谞讜 诇注住讜拽 讘讚讘专讬 转讜专讛

The Gemara clarifies: What formula of blessings does he recite? There is a dispute over the formula of the blessings as well. Rav Yehuda said that Shmuel said: The formula of this blessing is like the standard formula for blessings recited over other mitzvot: Blessed are You, Lord our God, King of the universe, Who sanctified us with his mitzvot and commanded us to engage in matters of Torah.

讜专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 诪住讬讬诐 讘讛 讛讻讬 讛注专讘 谞讗 讛壮 讗诇讛讬谞讜 讗转 讚讘专讬 转讜专转讱 讘驻讬谞讜 讜讘驻讬驻讬讜转 注诪讱 讘讬转 讬砖专讗诇 讜谞讛讬讛 讗谞讞谞讜 讜爪讗爪讗讬谞讜 讜爪讗爪讗讬 注诪讱 讘讬转 讬砖专讗诇 讻诇谞讜 讬讜讚注讬 砖诪讱 讜注讜住拽讬 转讜专转讱 讘专讜讱 讗转讛 讛壮 讛诪诇诪讚 转讜专讛 诇注诪讜 讬砖专讗诇

And Rabbi Yo岣nan concludes the blessing by adding the following: Lord our God, make the words of Your Torah sweet in our mouths and in the mouths of Your people, the house of Israel, so that we and our descendants and the descendants of Your people, the house of Israel, may be those who know Your name and engage in Your Torah. Blessed are You, Lord, Who teaches Torah to His people Israel.

讜专讘 讛诪谞讜谞讗 讗诪专 讗砖专 讘讞专 讘谞讜 诪讻诇 讛注诪讬诐 讜谞转谉 诇谞讜 讗转 转讜专转讜 讘专讜讱 讗转讛 讛壮 谞讜转谉 讛转讜专讛 讗诪专 专讘 讛诪谞讜谞讗 讝讜 讛讬讗 诪注讜诇讛 砖讘讘专讻讜转

And Rav Hamnuna said an additional formula: Who has chosen us from all the peoples and given us His Torah. Blessed are You, Lord, Giver of the Torah. With regard to this formula, Rav Hamnuna said: This concise blessing is the most outstanding of all the blessings over the Torah, as it combines thanks to God for giving us the Torah as well as acclaim for the Torah and for Israel.

讛诇讻讱 诇讬诪专讬谞讛讜 诇讻讜诇讛讜:

Since several formulas for the blessing over Torah were suggested, each with its own distinct advantage, the Gemara concludes: Therefore, let us recite them all as blessings over the Torah.

转谞谉 讛转诐 讗诪专 诇讛诐 讛诪诪讜谞讛 讘专讻讜 讘专讻讛 讗讞转 讜讛诐 讘专讻讜 讜拽专讗讜 注砖专转 讛讚讘专讜转 砖诪注 讜讛讬讛 讗诐 砖诪讜注 讜讬讗诪专 讜讘专讻讜 讗转 讛注诐 砖诇砖 讘专讻讜转 讗诪转 讜讬爪讬讘 讜注讘讜讚讛 讜讘专讻转 讻讛谞讬诐 讜讘砖讘转 诪讜住讬驻讬谉 讘专讻讛 讗讞转 诇诪砖诪专 讛讬讜爪讗

The Gemara returns to dealing with the blessings that accompany Shema, and describes the practice in the Temple. We learned there, in a mishna in tractate Tamid: In the morning the deputy High Priest appointed to oversee activity in the Temple, said to the priests who were members of the priestly watch [mishmar] on duty that week: Recite a single blessing. The members of the priestly watch recited a blessing, and read the Ten Commandments, Shema, VeHaya im Shamoa and VaYomer, the standard recitation of Shema. Additionally, they blessed the people with three blessings. These blessings were: True and Firm, the blessing of redemption recited after Shema; Avoda, service, the special blessing recited over God鈥檚 acceptance of the sacrifices with favor, similar to the blessing of Temple Service recited in the Amida prayer; and the priestly benediction, recited in the form of a prayer without the outstretched hands that usually accompany that blessing (Tosafot). And on Shabbat one blessing is added to bless the outgoing priestly watch, as the watch serving in the Temple was replaced on Shabbat.

诪讗讬 讘专讻讛 讗讞转 讻讬 讛讗 讚专讘讬 讗讘讗 讜专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讘专 讗讘讗 讗拽诇注讜 诇讛讛讜讗 讗转专讗 讘注讜 诪谞讬讬讛讜 诪讗讬 讘专讻讛 讗讞转 诇讗 讛讜讛 讘讬讚讬讬讛讜 讜讗转讜 砖讬讬诇讜讛讜 诇专讘 诪转谞讛 诇讗 讛讜讛 讘讬讚讬讛 讗转讜 砖讬讬诇讜讛讜 诇专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 诇讛讜 讛讻讬 讗诪专 砖诪讜讗诇 讗讛讘讛 专讘讛

Certain details in this mishna are not sufficiently clear. First, what is the single blessing that the deputy High Priest instructed the guards to recite? The Gemara relates: It is like the incident where Rabbi Abba and Rabbi Yosei bar Abba happened to visit a certain unnamed place, and the people there asked them: What is the single blessing mentioned in the mishna? They did not have an answer readily available. So they came and asked Rav Mattana, and he too did not have an answer readily available. They came and asked Rav Yehuda, and he told them: Shmuel said as follows: An abounding love is the single blessing recited by the priestly watch.

讜讗诪专 专讘讬 讝专讬拽讗 讗诪专 专讘讬 讗诪讬 讗诪专 专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 诇拽讬砖 讬讜爪专 讗讜专 讻讬 讗转讗 专讘 讬爪讞拽 讘专 讬讜住祝 讗诪专 讛讗 讚专讘讬 讝专讬拽讗 诇讗讜 讘驻讬专讜砖 讗转诪专 讗诇讗 诪讻诇诇讗 讗转诪专 讚讗诪专 专讘讬 讝专讬拽讗 讗诪专 专讘讬 讗诪讬 讗诪专 专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 诇拽讬砖 讝讗转 讗讜诪专转 讘专讻讜转 讗讬谉 诪注讻讘讜转 讝讜 讗转 讝讜

Rabbi Zerika said that Rabbi Ami said that Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish said a different answer: This single blessing is: Who creates light. That was how Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish鈥檚 statement was received in Babylonia, yet when Rav Yitz岣k bar Yosef came from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia, he said that this halakha was not a direct quote of a statement by Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish. That which Rabbi Zerika said was not stated explicitly by Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish, but rather it was inferred from another statement. As Rabbi Zerika said that Rabbi Ami said that Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish said: From the expression: Recite a single blessing, in the mishna in tractate Tamid, it follows that failure to recite one of the blessings recited before Shema does not prevent one from reciting the other. This means that if only one of the blessings was recited, the obligation to recite that blessing was fulfilled, as the two blessings are not mutually dependent.

讗讬 讗诪专转 讘砖诇诪讗 讬讜爪专 讗讜专 讛讜讜 讗诪专讬 讛讬讬谞讜 讚讘专讻讜转 讗讬谉 诪注讻讘讜转 讝讜 讗转 讝讜 讚诇讗 拽讗 讗诪专讬 讗讛讘讛 专讘讛

The conclusion was drawn from Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish鈥檚 statement that he held that the single blessing recited was: Who creates light. The considerations that led the Sages to that conclusion were: Granted, if you say that they would recite: Who creates light, then the conclusion of Reish Lakish, that failure to recite one of the blessings recited before Shema does not prevent one from reciting the other, is understandable, as they recited: Who creates light, and did not recite: An abounding love, and they nonetheless fulfilled their obligation.

Scroll To Top