Siman 70

Women and slaves are exempt from the recitation of Shema, because it is a time-bound positive commandment. For the recitation of Shema of the day is only until three hours; and that of the night, even though it applies all night, nevertheless that of the night is not fulfilled during the day, and it is time-bound. And they are likewise exempt from the blessings of the recitation of Shema, as they are also time-bound. And even though they are obligated in prayer as I wrote in siman 106, prayer is different because it is a request for mercy. And likewise regarding the blessing of the moon, women are exempt (Magen Avraham, subsection 1). Nevertheless, if they wish, they may recite the blessings and the recitation of Shema, just like sukkah and lulav from which they are exempt and yet recite the blessings over them. Our women do so, and may a blessing come upon them. And in the morning blessings they are obligated by law, for they are also included in the matters for which all the morning blessings were instituted. And regarding "Baruch She'amar" and "Yishtabach," there is no obligation upon them, and they may say them. And why should they not be able to sing to Hashem, just as Miriam and all the women of Israel did at the splitting of the Sea of Reeds?

And behold, it is certain that regarding the oneness of the Name and His love – women are obligated like men. And in truth, our teacher, the Beit Yosef, in his great work, brought in the name of the book Ohel Moed that women are obligated in the first verse of the oneness of the Name, see there. And if so, according to the poskim who hold that the obligation of the recitation of Shema is only the first verse, if so, what is this that they are exempt from the recitation of Shema? Furthermore: our teachers, the authors of the Shulchan Aruch, wrote that it is proper to teach them that they should accept upon themselves the yoke of the kingdom of Heaven, and they should recite at least the first verse. Thus far their words. And it is difficult: what is "and it is proper," behold there is an obligation? However, this is not a difficulty, for granted they are obligated in this, nevertheless they are not commanded to recite these verses. Rather, they are commanded to love and to surrender their souls for the sanctification of His Name, may He be blessed. Furthermore: even if they must recite these verses, is the obligation specifically at the time of the recitation of Shema? But the truth is that they are not obligated in the recitation of the verses, and for this reason, that which our teachers, the authors of the Shulchan Aruch, said, "that it is proper to teach them," is correct. But there is no obligation.

And minors are also exempt according to our teacher, Tam, specifically when they have not reached the age of chinuch. And according to Rashi, even if they have reached the age of chinuch, for the reason that it is not common for him to be with him at the time of the evening Keriat Shema, and he is sleeping in the morning. Therefore, the sages did not impose upon the father to train them as with other mitzvot. And it is proper to act according to our teacher, Tam. And so we guide the minors to pray every day.

There is one who says that women are obligated in the remembrance of the Exodus from Egypt, and therefore they are obligated to say "Emet VeYatziv" and to join "redemption" to prayer (Magen Avraham, subsection 1). For the obligation of mentioning the Exodus from Egypt is throughout the entire day and the entire night, and if so, this is not "time-bound" and women are obligated. And there is one who disagrees regarding this, as there are two obligations: by day and by night. And that of the day does not apply at night, for if one forgot to mention it by day—that of the night does not avail for that of the day, and similarly that of the night does not apply by day. And it remains a positive commandment that is time-bound, and women are exempt (Sha'agat Aryeh, siman 13). And perforce one must say so, for behold, according to the Rabbis of Ben Zoma at the end of the first chapter of Berakhot, they are not obligated in the mentioning of the Exodus from Egypt at night, and according to them women are certainly exempt. And if it should enter your mind that according to Ben Zoma they are obligated, the Shas should have mentioned this distinction. And in truth, the obligation of the Exodus from Egypt is not counted among the positive commandments, as I wrote at the end of siman 67, see there. And they did not impose this obligation upon women since the Exodus from Egypt is included in the parsha of tzitzit, and women are exempt from tzitzit. And therefore, when the Mishnah and the Gemara and the poskim said that women are exempt from Keriat Shema, and in Keriat Shema the Exodus from Egypt is also included, if it should enter your mind that in this they are obligated—they should have specified. And since they left their words undefined—learn from this that they are exempt.

A groom who marries a virgin is exempt from the recitation of Shema on the first night, for his heart is preoccupied lest he not find her a virgin. This is a preoccupation of a mitzvah and he is exempt. But one who marries a widow is obligated, for there is no preoccupation of virginity. And a preoccupation of a voluntary nature, such as if his ship sank in the sea – does not exempt, for he is required to settle his mind. And a groom who did not have relations on the first night is exempt for up to three nights, and from then on he is accustomed to her and is obligated in the recitation of Shema. And some say that he is exempt for four nights (Tur), such as if he married before he recited the morning recitation of Shema, for the exemption is until three days besides the day of the wedding canopy (Magen Avraham, subsection 2). Or it is possible that even if he did not marry, the preparation for the marriage is a mitzvah, and it exempts from another mitzvah (Beit Yosef and Taz, subsection 1). And if he wished to be stringent upon himself and recite, the Rosh ruled in the second chapter that he is not permitted, for it appears like yohara. But the Rif and the Rambam ruled that he is permitted. And so too there is a dispute whether he is also exempt from the morning recitation of Shema or only the evening recitation of Shema (see Tosafot Yom Tov, chapter two). However, all this was in their days, when they would concentrate intently. But now that other people also do not concentrate so much – the groom is also obligated in the recitation of Shema. And it is forbidden for him to be stringent and not recite, for it appears like yohara, as if he always concentrates intently and now it is impossible for him to concentrate so much. And such is the simple custom and one should not change it.

The Rambam wrote in chapter 2, law 5: If one was engaged in the study of Torah and the time for the recitation of Shema arrived—he stops and recites, and recites the blessings before it and after it. If he was engaged in the needs of the public—he shall not stop, but rather finish their business, and recite if there remains time to recite. And his reasoning is that we hold that one who is engaged in a mitzvah is exempt from a mitzvah, and you have no mitzvah greater than being engaged in the needs of the public. And even though the study of Torah is greater than all the mitzvot, and why should he stop, this is because if it were not so, he would never perform any mitzvah. And the Torah was given to learn and to do. Furthermore: is it as if when he recites Shema this is not the study of Torah (see Yerushalmi Shabbat, chapter 1, halacha 2)? But regarding other mitzvot this does not apply. And even if time remains to perform the mitzvah afterward, nevertheless, since he is engaged in it—he must finish it, even if the time for the recitation of Shema passes. And so too, one who teaches Torah to students and the time for the recitation of Shema arrived—he shall not stop, for the study of Torah of the public is a mitzvah in its own right. And so we found regarding our teacher, the Holy One, that he did not stop, and only passed his hands over his eyes and recited the verse "Shema Yisrael," as is explained in Berakhot (13b), see there.

However, the poskim wrote regarding the exemption of those occupied with the needs of the public, that this applied in the earlier generations when they occupied themselves with public needs entirely for the sake of Heaven, and not in this time. However, this is not a general rule. For even nowadays, if they are occupied with them, even for the sake of saving their money, and there is no one else to exert effort except him – he is exempt from the recitation of Shema even if the time passes (Kessef Mishneh and Magen Avraham subsection 4). Therefore, our teacher, the Beit Yosef, did not bring this in the Shulchan Aruch section 4, that nowadays one is obligated, because even nowadays one is sometimes exempt. And one must understand according to the context.

The Rambam also wrote there: If one was engaged in eating, or was in a bathhouse, or engaged in a haircut, or turning over skins, or engaged in a legal case—he finishes and afterward recites Keriat Shema. And if he was afraid lest the time for recitation pass, and he stopped and recited—behold, this is praiseworthy. Thus far his words. And the Ra'avad disagrees with him, and this is his wording: Not so, but rather he stops and recites even though there is time to recite, because it is from the Torah. And if there is no time, he stops even for the rabbinic prayer. Thus far his words. And the commentators have elaborated on the reason for their dispute. But it seems more likely that they do not disagree at all. For the Rambam is dealing with one who began permissibly before the time for Keriat Shema arrived, and therefore he does not need to stop unless the time for Keriat Shema will pass. And the Ra'avad is dealing with one who began in prohibition, and therefore he is obligated to stop (Bach). And you should know that it is so, for behold the Rambam wrote: If one was engaged in eating... and if it should enter your mind that he began after the time for Keriat Shema arrived, how did he begin to eat? For behold, he is a wicked person to eat before the prayer. Rather, it is certain that he began to eat at night and it extended into the day, such as at weddings and the like. And it seems to me that this is the intent of the Tur later in siman 89, where he wrote: And if he began to eat before the morning star rose, the Rambam wrote that he does not need to stop, see there. And the commentators wrote that a mistaken manuscript happened upon the Tur regarding the words of the Rambam, for this is not found in the Rambam except regarding Mincha (see there in the Beit Yosef and in the Bach). And it seems that his intent is regarding these words of his. And the Ra'avad was of the opinion that the Rambam was dealing with one who began in prohibition, and therefore he disagreed with him. But in truth they do not disagree, and so is the primary ruling (as the Magen Avraham wrote at the end of subsection 6). And see what I wrote above in siman 38, section 10.