Berachot 2a-4b: Real recitation upon one's bed

First, read the Rosh on Berachot 2a in English here.

מאימתי קורין את שמע בערבין? משעה שהכהנים נכנסים לאכול בתרומתן.

עד סוף האשמורה הראשונה, דברי רבי אליעזר. וחכמים אומרים: עד חצות. רבן גמליאל אומר:  עד שיעלה עמוד השחר.

{Brachot 2a}
[1] MISHNAH. FROM WHAT TIME MAY ONE RECITE THE SHEMA' IN THE EVENING? FROM THE TIME THAT THE PRIESTS ENTER [THEIR HOUSES] IN ORDER TO EAT THEIRTERUMAH UNTIL THE END OF THE FIRST WATCH. THESE ARE THE WORDS OF R. ELIEZER. THE SAGES SAY: UNTIL MIDNIGHT. R. GAMALIEL SAYS: UNTIL THE DAWN COMES UP.

  פירש״י ואנן שקורין שמע בבית הכנסת קודם צאת הכוכבים אין אנו יוצאים ילי חובתנו אלא בקריאת  שמע שעל מטתנו פרק ראשון. ומה שאנו קורין אותה בבית הכנסת כלי לעמוד בתפלה מתוך דברי תורה.והכי תניא בברכות ירושלמי בריש פירקין הקורא את שמע קודם לכן לא יצא. א״כ למה קורין אותה בבית הכנסת. לא להוציא (את הרבים) ידי חובתן אלא כלי לעמוד בתפלה מתוך דברי תורה

Rashi explains: And we who read Shema in shul before tzais hakochavim, we only fulfill our obligation with kriat Shema upon our beds, the first parasha. And that which we read it in shul is in order to transition into tefillah [J: meaning Shmoneh Esrei] from words of Torah. And so is taught in a brayta in Berachot Yerushalmi [1b], at the beginning of our perek: One who reads Shema before this does not fulfill [his obligation]. If so, why do we read it in shul? Not (for the public) to fulfill their obligation, but so as to transition into tefillah [J: Shmoneh Esrei] from words of Torah.

וכן כתב הריב״א והרי״ץ גיאת ז״ל וכן כתב רב עמרם ז״ל [נ״א ומחמת זה כתב שצריך לברך אקב״ו על קריאת שמע כשהוא קורא לפני מטתו.]ש


מתוך דבריהם משמע שאדם יוצא ידי חובתו מתוך אותה קריאה 

And so wrote the Riva and the Ritz Gaius zal, and so wrote Rav Amram za'l. [Another nusach: And because of that he wrote that one needs to bless asher kideshanu bemitzvosav vetzivanu al kriat shema when he recites before his bed.]

It is implied from their words that a person fulfills his obligation via that recitation.

This sounds good, although the Rosh proceeds to attack the idea, on the basis arguments presented in Rabbenu Tam. At the end, it seems that his conclusion is that the actual Shema recitation is together with Maariv, even when done early, and the reading of a single parsha of Shema upon one's bed is a separate din entirely.

I will attempt here to defend the idea put forth in Rashi, citing the Yerushalmi, in the face of all the various attacks. Let us consider the arguments:

 ול״נ לר״ת ז״ל שהרי ק״ש שעל מטתו אין אנו קורין כי אם פרשה ראשונה ושלא בברכותיה ובבית הכנסת אנו קורין אותה כולה בברכותיה בלא זמנה ועוד דקאמר בגמרא אם תלמיד חכם הוא אינו צריך לקרות ק״ש על מטתו. ויש לדחות דמיירי היכא דקרא בזמנה בבהכ״נ. ועוד הקשה דאם כן אנו נוהגין כריב״ל דאמר תפלות באמצע תקנום ואנן קי״ל כרבי יוחנן דאמר דק״ש של ערבית תחלה ואח״כ תפלה דתניא לקמן בפירקין כוותיה. 

And this displeases Rabbenu Tam, for kriat Shema upon one's bed, we only recite the first parasha, and without its brachos, while in shul we recite it in its entirety, not at its proper time. And furthermore, it states in the gemara that if he is a talmid chacham he does not need to recite kriat Shema upon his bed. And there is to push this off, that it is dealing with where he [J: already] recited it at its proper time in shul. And he asks further that if so, we are practicing like Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi, who said that the tefillot [J: Shmoneh Esrei] were instituted in the middle [J: meaning, Shema of morning, then Shmoneh Esrei of Shacharit, Shmoneh Esrei of Mincha, Shmoneh Esrei of Maariv, and then Shema of night]. And meanwhile, we establish [the halacha] like Rabbi Yochanan, who said that recital of Shema at night is first, and afterwards is tefillah [J: Shemoneh Esrei], for we teach a brayta later in our perek like him.

In terms of the first objection, that upon his bed, he is reciting only the first parasha, meaning the first few pesukim, perhaps this is indeed enough to fulfill the obligation. Consider Berachot 13b:

Our Rabbis taught: 'Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one': this was R. Judah the Prince's recital of the Shema'.¹⁶  Rab said once to R. Hiyya: I do not see Rabbi accept upon himself the yoke of the kingdom of heaven.¹⁷  He replied to him: Son of Princes!¹⁸  In the moment when he passes his hand over his eyes, he accepts upon himself the yoke of the kingdom of heaven. Does he finish it afterwards or does he not finish it afterwards?¹⁹  Bar Kappara said: He does not finish it afterwards; R. Simeon son of Rabbi said, He does finish it afterwards. Said Bar Kappara to R. Simeon the son of Rabbi: On my view that he does not finish it afterwards, there is a good reason why Rabbi always is anxious to take a lesson in which there is mention of the exodus from Egypt.²⁰  But on your view that he does finish it afterwards, why is he anxious to take such a lesson? — So as to mention the going forth from Egypt at the proper time.²¹

R. Ela the son of R. Samuel b. Martha said in the name of Rab: If one said 'Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one', and was then overpowered by sleep, he has performed his obligation. R. Nahman said to his slave Daru: For the first verse prod me,²²  but do not prod me for any more. R. Joseph said to R. Joseph the son of Rabbah: How did your father use to do? He replied: For the first verse he used to take pains [to keep awake], for the rest he did not use to take pains.

Now, they instituted other parshiyot of Shema to recite, and we do so in the daytime Shema. And in the nighttime Shema as well, if the Shema of Maariv is said at the appropriate time, then he is saying the full Shema. And if not, he still said these instituted parshiyot, while his basic obligation of the first parsha he is fulfilling upon his bed.

Therefore, I don't see this as a strong objection.

In terms of the Talmid Chacham being exempt from saying Shema upon his bed, indeed, the Rosh's answer is a pretty good one; it would be speaking about where he has already fulfilled his obligation, which could be a common case, such that the only concern is either mazikin or impure thoughts. It is somewhat difficult, though.

I would add that I think it likely that Shema was developed and instituted in stages, and in different ways. That is why there can be a machlokes between Rabbi Yochanan and Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi as to whether the Shema is recited in shul, or when in one's bed. How can you have a machlokes about something so basic?! First, because Maariv in its entirety is a reshut. Secondly, because these practices developed in parallel.

So, initially both practices developed in parallel as a fulfillment for one's chova. And then, as one or the other won out, the opposite practice was not removed entirely, but given a different purpose. Thus, Shema upon one's bed might be just to drive off the mazikin; and Shema in shul might be simply leading in with words of Torah, akin to Ashrei.

So indeed, restore the objection that a talmid chacham need not say it; all these Amoraim were acting on the basis of the bed-time one not being the chovah; later practice adopted the contrary position.

And don't bother me with klalei horaah! That is if we were paskening from scratch, trying to determine how to conduct ourselves. Instead, at some stage, this was already paskened and is established practice. And Rashi explains how this came about. And then, it is a matter of making everyone happy while still establishing, as we seem to have, that the primary fulfillment is upon one's bed, such that we can, if we wish, say Shema before tzais.

Let us consider the objections again:

And this displeases Rabbenu Tam, for kriat Shema upon one's bed, we only recite the first parasha, and without its brachos, while in shul we recite it in its entirety, not at its proper time.

But the first parasha suffices, mei'ikkar hadin, as we have seen. And we know that the parallel, halachically deflated practice of reading in shul is still in existence, such that nobody is not saying those extra parshiyot somewhere.


What about the fact that we say no berachot upon our bed? Well, according to some opinions / nuschaot, we should say a blessing upon our beds, of asher kiddeshanu bemitzvotav vetzivanu al kriat Shema. But if we have not instituted the bracha, because of the historical confusion or because often, people will indeed be reading the earlier Shema in a proper time, that is acceptable. The bracha is not meakev.

What about in shul, that we read the brachot of Shema? Well, those brachot are not really brachot in the sense of asher kiddeshanu bemitzvotav. They were instituted as liturgy, framing the brachot before and after. And those could be said earlier to fulfill the recommendation of juxtaposition. Consider the parallel, in the brachot of Shema in Shacharit:

The Mishna (Berakhot 9b) rules that "One recites the Shema… until the third hour of the day… and one who recites the Shema later loses nothing, as he is like one who reads the Torah…"

            The Gemara (10b) elaborates,

Rav Chisda said in the name of Mar Ukba: “What is the meaning of ‘HE LOSES NOTHING’?  He does not lose the berakhot.” 

It has been taught to the same effect: “He who says the Shema later loses nothing, being like one who reads from the Torah, but he says two blessings before and one after…"

We thus see that the blessings can be moved, and said outside their normal time frame.

Continuing with the next objection:

 And furthermore, it states in the gemara that if he is a talmid chacham he does not need to recite kriat Shema upon his bed. 

Indeed, that entire gemara was according to Rabbi Yochanan, that the primary obligation was being fulfilled earlier at Maariv. Practically, for us, if we have davened Maariv after tzais, then I would say that this gemara still holds true. Otherwise, indeed, even a talmid chacham needs to say at least the first parasha.

Note that it is Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi who says (4b):

R. Joshua b. Levi says: Though a man has recited the Shema' in the synagogue, it is a religious act to recite it again upon his bed. 

And then there are these explanations of why it is a religious act. It is possible that R' Yehoshua ben Levi simply meant that this is because he has not fulfilled; or that he gets an additional fulfillment of the literal ובשכבך. But it is not developed in this manner by others. And so, we have support for the idea that when one is deflated, there is still is validity and reason for doing the other.

The next objection:

 And he asks further that if so, we are practicing like Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi, who said that the tefillot [J: Shmoneh Esrei] were instituted in the middle [J: meaning, Shema of morning, then Shmoneh Esrei of Shacharit, Shmoneh Esrei of Mincha, Shmoneh Esrei of Maariv, and then Shema of night]. And meanwhile, we establish [the halacha] like Rabbi Yochanan, who said that recital of Shema at night is first, and afterwards is tefillah [J: Shemoneh Esrei], for we teach a brayta later in our perek like him.

Indeed, this a contradiction. But Rabbi Yochanan did not need a brayta as support, since as a first generation Amora of Eretz Yisrael, "he was a Tanna" and so could argue. And Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi was his older contemporary, also a first generation Amora of Eretz Yisrael. Perhaps he may also argue with a brayta, and both are reflecting an earlier tradition. In other words, I don't care that there was a support from a brayta. Perhaps this even reflects an earlier Tannaitic tradition.

And besides, practically we are still fulfilling Rabbi Yochanan (and the brayta) and putting the Shema before the Shemoneh Esrei, so as to have Geulah and Tefillah juxtaposed! But this could simply be as a way of leading in with a devar Torah; or so as to get the final instituted bracha of Geulah together with tefillah. It is not a total contradiction if we are still fulfilling it, in its 'deflated' state.

You can read in the Rosh the difficulties with Rabbenu Tam's position. In the end, I don't find it convincing. I would say that early Maariv is acceptable because Maariv does not have a keva, because it is a reshut. As such, I don't believe it is really a problem of tartei desatrei, as discussed there. But I don't think the time of Shema has anything to do with the Amidah, except that it is dragged along with it.