Mishneh Torah, Reading the Shema 1-2

Sugya Map

• Issue: Delineating the d'Oraita components of Kri'at Shema and the nature of Zechirat Yetziat Mitzrayim within the minyan ha'mitzvot.
• Nafka Mina(s):
  • Scope of kavanah requirement: Is it for one verse, one parsha, or all three?
  • Status of Zechirat Yetziat Mitzrayim for women (as mitzvat aseh she'hazman grama).
  • Implications for bedi'eved cases where only part of Shema was recited.
• Primary Sources: Devarim 6:4-9, 11:13-21, Bamidbar 15:37-41; Mishneh Torah, Hilchot Kri'at Shema 1:1-2; Berachot 13a.

Text Snapshot

"שתי פעמים בכל יום קורין קריאת שמע: בערב ובבקר... ומה הוא קורא? שלש פרשיות אלו: שמע ישראל... והיה אם שמוע... ויאמר..." (Mishneh Torah, Hilchot Kri'at Shema 1:1-2) "ומצוה להזכיר יציאת מצרים ביום ובלילה שנאמר למען תזכור את יום צאתך מארץ מצרים כל ימי חייך." (Mishneh Torah, Hilchot Kri'at Shema 1:2)

The Rambam's phrasing "שלש פרשיות אלו" ("these three sections") suggests a unified mitzvah encompassing all three. His explicit declaration "ומצוה להזכיר יציאת מצרים" ("and it is a mitzvah to mention the Exodus from Egypt") for Zechirat Yetziat Mitzrayim is notable, especially considering its omission from Sefer HaMitzvot.

Readings

Chinuch (Mitzvah 419)

The Chinuch posits that only the first verse, "Shema Yisrael...," constitutes the d'Oraita obligation of Kri'at Shema. The inclusion of the subsequent parshiyot is a Rabbinic enactment, a chiddush that sharply contrasts with the Rambam's seemingly holistic presentation in Mishneh Torah.

Nachal Eitan on Mishneh Torah, Reading the Shema 1:1:1

The Nachal Eitan addresses the apparent contradiction regarding Zechirat Yetziat Mitzrayim: if it's a mitzvah, why isn't it counted in Sefer HaMitzvot? He offers that the verse "למען תזכור" ("in order that you remember," Devarim 16:3) is a lashon n'tinat ta'am (a statement of reason), not a direct tzav (command). Alternatively, citing the Zohar (Vayakhel 202b), he suggests Zechirat Yetziat Mitzrayim is subsumed within the mitzvah of Yichud Hashem.

Friction

Kushya

How does the Rambam's statement that "these three sections" comprise Kri'at Shema align with the view (e.g., Chinuch) that only the first verse is d'Oraita? Furthermore, if Zechirat Yetziat Mitzrayim is a mitzvah, why is it not enumerated in Sefer HaMitzvot?

Terutz

The Mishneh Torah often presents halacha l'ma'aseh in its full, integrated form, blending d'Oraita and d'Rabanan components into a single kiyum (fulfillment). While the fundamental d'Oraita kavanah may be limited to the first verse (as clarified by Rambam himself in Hilchot Kri'at Shema 2:3), the mitzvah as practiced includes all three parshiyot by Rabbinic decree. For Zechirat Yetziat Mitzrayim, the Nachal Eitan's terutz (being a lashon n'tinat ta'am or subsumed in Yichud Hashem) elegantly resolves its absence from Sefer HaMitzvot, even while its recitation is a mitzvah with a Torah source.

Intertext

• The Rambam's Sefer HaMitzvot (Positive Commandment 10) explicitly counts Kri'at Shema as one mitzvah, not three distinct ones corresponding to each parsha. This supports the idea that the d'Oraita core is singular, with the additional sections constituting the full Rabbinically-ordained practice.
• Berachot 13a discusses the extent of the d'Oraita obligation, with various opinions regarding which sections are indispensable, forming the bedrock for Rishonim's distinctions.

Psak/Practice

The Shulchan Aruch (OC 60:5) rules that kavanah (intention) is absolutely required only for the first verse of Shema Yisrael. The recitation of all three parshiyot is universally accepted as the proper kiyum of the mitzvah, reflecting the Rabbinic expansion. For Zechirat Yetziat Mitzrayim, its unique classification impacts nafka minot like women's obligation, where Rishonim (e.g., Sha'agat Aryeh vs. Magen Avraham OC 70) debate if it qualifies as mitzvat aseh she'hazman grama.

Takeaway

The Rambam masterfully integrates d'Oraita and d'Rabanan elements in Mishneh Torah, presenting Kri'at Shema as a cohesive whole while lomdus reveals its layered obligations. The nature of a mitzvah is not solely determined by explicit command but also by its conceptual depth and practical integration.