Siman 63

We learned in the first chapter of Berakhot (10b): Beit Shammai say: In the evening every person shall recline and recite, and in the morning he shall stand, as it is said: "and when you lie down and when you rise up." That is to say: in the manner of lying down and in the manner of rising up. And Beit Hillel say: Every person recites in his usual manner, as it is said: "and when you walk by the way." If so, why is it said "and when you lie down and when you rise up"? At the time when people lie down, and at the time when people rise up. That is to say: it comes to teach the time of the recitation of Shema. Rabbi Tarfon said: I was coming on the way, and I reclined to recite according to the words of Beit Shammai, and I endangered myself because of bandits. They said to him: You were worthy of being liable for your own life, for you transgressed the words of Beit Hillel.

And based on this, the Tur and the Shulchan Aruch ruled that one may recite it while walking, or standing, or lying down, or riding upon an animal, or sitting… and one who wishes to be stringent to stand when he is sitting and recite it while standing is called a "transgressor." Thus far their words. And even though in several disputes between Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel, where Beit Shammai is stringent and Beit Hillel is lenient, nevertheless one who wishes to be stringent like Beit Shammai—we do not prevent him. However, this dispute is not similar to all other disputes, for in all other disputes even Beit Hillel admit that there is a stringency in the words of Beit Shammai, and therefore one who wishes to be stringent, why should he not be stringent? But here, there is no stringency at all according to the opinion of Beit Hillel in the words of Beit Shammai, for according to Beit Hillel it is all the same whether one is standing or sitting. And since he is stringent—he thereby demonstrates that the halacha is like Beit Shammai. Furthermore: since according to Beit Hillel the derivation of "when you lie down and when you rise up" refers to the time of the recitation of Shema, and if so, when he is stringent like Beit Shammai, for according to them it comes to require lying down in the evening specifically, and standing in the morning specifically, and if so, the time of the recitation of Shema would be nullified through this. And therefore Rabbi Tarfon was also punished.

And behold, according to this it appears that whether he is standing it is forbidden for him to sit, or whether he is sitting it is forbidden for him to stand. However, the Tur and the Shulchan Aruch mentioned only that one should not stand when he is sitting. And I saw one who wrote that in truth, one who is standing is permitted to sit, for in this it does not appear as a stringency but rather that it is his desire to sit, as sitting is better for a person than standing (Eliyah Rabbah in the name of Mahari Kohen). But it is difficult: for if so, why was Rava Tarfon punished? Is reclining not also better for a person even than sitting? And the truth appears to be that in the morning service, where according to Beit Shammai it must specifically be in standing—in this case it is forbidden to stand when he is sitting. And in the evening service, where according to Beit Shammai it must specifically be in sitting, in that case it is forbidden when he is standing to sit, for it appears that he is acting according to Beit Shammai. But the opposite, in the morning service when he is standing—it is permitted to sit, and in the evening service when he is sitting—it is permitted to stand. For in this it is impossible to fear that he is acting according to Beit Shammai, for on the contrary, this is the opposite of Beit Shammai. Therefore the Tur and Shulchan Aruch, who are dealing with the morning service, wrote that when he is sitting it is forbidden to stand. And so it appears primary for the din (and so it is implied in the Bach). And it further appears that specifically when he does so because of the law in order to fulfill his obligation according to Beit Shammai there is a prohibition, as with Rabbi Tarfon who said "and I reclined to recite according to the words of Beit Shammai." But when he does so without intent, such as people who are not at rest who rise and sit, and return and rise, and return and sit—there is no concern. And according to the Zohar, the Kriat Shema of the morning service and its blessings are specifically while sitting until "praises to the Most High God," at which point he should rise and stand. And so it is explained in Peri Etz Chaim and in the Kavanot, and it is called "the prayer of sitting."

And behold, even though one may recite in his usual manner, whether standing, sitting, or walking, nevertheless, if he was walking on the way and wishes to recite Shema – he must stand for the first verse. For he does this so that he can focus his intent, as the primary intent is in the first verse. And there are those who require standing for the entire first parasha, so that he should not be like one reciting in a casual manner. And there is one who wishes to say that to stand for the entire parasha is a prohibition, for it appears as though he is acting according to Beit Shammai (Bach). And they disagreed with him, for since he is already standing because of the first verse – it no longer appears as Beit Shammai (Taz subsection 2 and Magen Avraham subsection 4). And it is obvious that for "Baruch shem kevod malkhuto" he must stand (ibid.). And also one who is riding on a donkey must stand, but one who is sitting in a wagon does not need to stand, for he sits at rest and can focus his intent well (ibid.). But the rider cannot focus his intent well while the donkey is walking.

It is stated in the Gemara (13b): One who is lying parkadan may not recite Keriat Shema. Rashi explained: Lying on his back with his face upward. And the Rambam in the second chapter (halacha 2) wrote: Whether his face is upward, or whether he is lying on his face with his back upward. And the reason is that this is not the way of proper conduct. But when he lies on his side, it is permitted to recite ab initio, and he does not need to stand even when he has no exertion to stand. This is the opinion of most of the poskim. However, some say that this is specifically when he is already lying down and has exertion to stand, such as if he needs to put on his clothes. But when he has no exertion in this, such as when he is lying in his clothes and can easily stand – he is obligated to stand. Our teacher, the Rema, inclines toward this opinion; however, most of the poskim do not hold so (and so wrote the Magen Avraham and the Taz, subsection 1). And one who is very stout, and cannot turn on his side and is forced to lie parkadan, or one who is ill – he tilts slightly to his side and recites. And if he cannot tilt at all – it is permitted to recite thus. And a healthy man should not lie parkadan even without Keriat Shema, but should tilt slightly (Gemara). And it appears that face upward is worse than face downward, for with face upward there is a concern that he will become warmed and see a seminal emission. For so it implies there in the Gemara and Rashi, see there.

The primary intention is in the first verse, as I have written several times. And "Baruch shem kevod malkhuto le'olam va'ed" is included. Therefore, if one recited and did not direct his heart in the first verse – he has not fulfilled his obligation, and he repeats and recites. And even according to the one who holds that mitzvot do not require intention, he admits in this case, for this is the intention of the mitzvah. But the intention of the heart is required, as I wrote in siman 60, section 7, see there. And this is not like one who says "Shema, Shema" whom we silence, since he does this because he did not have intention the first time. Furthermore: for in truth he must say it a second time in a whisper. Furthermore: that he can wait a little (Taz, subsection 3). And if he remembered that he did not have intention in Shema until he finished "Ve'ahavta" – he returns to the beginning, and repeats and recites the first parsha in its entirety (Magen Avraham, subsection 6). And similarly, if he did not remember until after "Vehaya im shamoa" – he also returns to the beginning, and recites the first parsha and not the second. For post facto it does not invalidate when he preceded the second to the first, as I wrote in siman 64. And if he did not have intention in "Baruch shem kevod malkhuto," if he remembered before he began "Ve'ahavta" – he should return to say it with intention. And if he remembered afterward – he does not need to return, and we have already explained in siman 61, section 6, see there. (The Magen Avraham, subsection 6, wrote in the name of Sefer Hasidim: when one did not have intention in the first verse, he should recite the parsha two times, see there. And it implies even if he has not yet recited the parsha. And it requires further study.)

Since the primary intent is for the first verse, therefore, if he was drowsing, they trouble him and wake him up until he recites the first verse while he is truly awake. But from here onward, they do not trouble him until he recites while truly awake, and even if he recited while drowsing—he has fulfilled his obligation. And so too, if he had another unavoidable circumstance such that he cannot recite with kavanah—he has fulfilled his obligation, except for the first verse. And we have already written in siman 58, section 16, that even if all three parshiyot are obligatory from the Torah, nevertheless, there is a difference in kavanah between the first verse and all the parshiyot, and between the first parsha and the second; see there in section 17.

And just as there is a difference between the first verse and the rest of the entire Shema regarding intent, so too there is a difference between the first parasha and the second regarding casual reading, because it is written: "And you shall speak of them." And we expound in Yoma (19a): Make them permanent. Therefore, one who reads the Shema may not wink with his eyes, nor signal with his lips, nor point with his fingers during the first parasha, which is the acceptance of the yoke of the Kingdom of Heaven, because it appears as if he is reading casually. And even for the sake of a mitzvah he may not signal… And from the Rambam it is implied that it is also forbidden in the second parasha, see there. Therefore, if he was engaged in work and wishes to read the Shema—he must desist from his work until he reads the first parasha. And according to the opinion of the Rambam, it is possible that this is so even in the second, as I have written. And all this is so that he should not be like one who reads casually.

And specifically to perform the labor is forbidden. However, to descend from the place of his labor he is not obligated, and he may recite it there. Therefore, craftsmen who work at the top of a tree, or at the top of a building, or in another place – do not need to descend but rather recite while they stand there. And even a homeowner engaged in his own labor – does not need to descend. And even though regarding prayer one must descend as I wrote in siman 90 – this is because prayer is long and requires kavvanah throughout its entirety, which is not the case with Kiryat Shema. And a porter who carries a load on his shoulders – may recite Kiryat Shema thus, for this does not confuse him. But he should not begin at the time he loads the burden upon himself or at the time he removes it from his shoulder, because then he has a bit of preoccupation and will not be able to focus, for his heart is not settled upon him. And also if he began beforehand, it appears that he should not load and should not unload until he finishes the entire Kiryat Shema, for who compels him to this? And regarding prayer it appears that even when the load is on his shoulder – he should not pray until he unloads his burden. And the law of one who has drunk and a drunkard regarding Kiryat Shema is like regarding prayer, and it will be explained in siman 99.