“Which I command you this day, will be upon your heart.” Surely the word these, does not come to limit the mitzva of intent. On the contrary, from here you derive that the entire portion requires intent.

Rabba bar bar Ḥana said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Akiva; the entire portion requires intent.

Some teach this halakha stated by Rabbi Yoḥanan with regard to that which was taught in a Tosefta, where there is a tannaitic dispute. The first tanna holds: One who recites Shema must focus his heart for the entire Shema. Rabbi Aḥa says in the name of Rabbi Yehuda: Once he focused his heart for the first paragraph alone, he no longer requires intent. With regard to this Tosefta, Rabba bar bar Ḥana said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said: The halakha is in accordance with Rabbi Aḥa who said in the name of Rabbi Yehuda. While this differs from the previous version in form, it arrives at the same conclusion.

It was taught in another baraita on this subject, which cited different opinions. From: And they will be, recited in Shema, it is derived that it may not be recited out of order. From: Upon your heart, Rav Zutra says: To this point, there is the mitzva of intent; from here on, beginning with the second paragraph, there is only the mitzva of recitation. Rabbi Yoshiya says that it means the opposite: To this point, there is the mitzva of recitation; from here on there is only the mitzva of intent.

At first the Gemara understands that Rav Zutra required recitation only in the second paragraph, while in the first paragraph only intent was required. Therefore, the Gemara asks: What is different, that from here on, beginning with the second paragraph, there is the mitzva of recitation? Is it because it is written: “And you shall teach them to your children, to speak of them” (Deuteronomy 11:19)? This is no proof, as here too, in the first paragraph it is written: “And you shall speak of them.” The mitzva of recitation applies to the first paragraph as well.

Rather, he is saying as follows: To this point there is the mitzva of both intent and recitation, but from here on, there is only the mitzva of recitation without intent.

Again the Gemara asks: According to Rav Zutra, what is different, that to this point, in the first paragraph, there is the mitzva of both intent and recitation because there are two requirements in the first paragraph, as it is written: “Upon your heart…and you shall speak of them”? There, too, in the second paragraph it is also written: “And you shall place these words upon your heart…to speak of them,” indicating that intent is also required in that paragraph.

The Gemara responds: That verse is necessary to derive that which was taught by Rabbi Yitzḥak, who said: “And you shall place these words” refers literally to the paragraphs of Shema found in the phylacteries. The verse teaches that the placement of the phylacteries of the arm must be opposite the heart.

The Gemara now attempts to clarify the second opinion in the baraita. The Master said, Rabbi Yoshiya says: To this point at the end of the first paragraph, there is the mitzva of recitation; from here on there is the mitzva of intent. The Gemara asks: What is different, that from here on, beginning with the second paragraph, there is the mitzva of intent? Is it because it is written in the second paragraph: “And you shall place these words upon your heart”? That is no proof, as here too, in the first paragraph it is written: “Upon your heart.”

The Gemara responds that he is saying as follows: To this point, there is the mitzva of both recitation and intent, but from here on, there is only the mitzva of intent without recitation.

The Gemara continues: And what is different, that to this point, in the first paragraph, there is the mitzva of recitation and intent because there are two requirements, as it is written: Upon your heart as well as: And you shall speak of them? There, too, with regard to the second paragraph isn’t it written: And you shall place these words upon your heart…and you shall teach them to your children, to speak of them?

Rabbi Yoshiya responded: That verse refers to Torah study in general, not to the recitation of Shema in particular. And the Torah says the following: Teach your children Torah, that they will be well-versed in them.

The Sages taught in another baraita with regard to one who recites Shema and utters the verse, “Hear, Israel, the Lord is our God, the Lord is One.” Intent of the heart is only required to this point. This is the statement of Rabbi Meir. Rava said: In this matter, the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Meir.

It was taught in a baraita, Sumakhos says: One who extends his intonation of the word One [eḥad] while reciting Shema, is rewarded that his days and years are extended. Rav Aḥa bar Ya’akov said: This is only true if he extends the letter dalet, so the word eḥad is sounded in its entirety. Rav Ashi said: This is only so long as one does not pronounce the letter ḥet hurriedly.

The Gemara relates that Rabbi Yirmeya was seated before Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba. He saw that he was greatly extending his pronunciation of eḥad. He said to him: Once you have crowned Him in your thoughts over everything above, in Heaven, below, on earth, and in the four corners of the heavens, you need not extend any further.

Rav Natan bar Mar Ukva said that Rav Yehuda said: One must recite upon your heart, while standing in one place. The Gemara is perplexed: Does it enter your mind that upon your heart alone must be recited while standing in one place? What distinguishes that phrase from the rest of Shema? Rather, say: One must recite until upon your heart while standing in one place. From here on, one need not stand in one place. Rabbi Yoḥanan said: One must recite the entire first portion while standing in one place.

The Gemara notes: Rabbi Yoḥanan is consistent and follows his reasoning expressed elsewhere, as Rabba bar bar Ḥana said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Aḥa who said in the name of Rabbi Yehuda; one is required to recite the entire first paragraph of Shema with intent.

The Sages taught in a baraita: The single verse, “Hear, Israel, the Lord is our God, the Lord is One”; this is Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi’s recitation of Shema. The Gemara relates: Rav said to his uncle, Rabbi Ḥiyya: I did not see Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi accept the kingship of Heaven upon himself, meaning that he did not see him recite Shema. Rabbi Ḥiyya said to him: Son of noblemen [bar paḥtei], when Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi passed his hands over his face in the study hall in the middle of his lesson, he accepted the yoke of the kingdom of Heaven upon himself, as his Shema was comprised of a single verse.

Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi’s students and members of his household disputed: Does he complete Shema later or does he not complete it later? Bar Kappara says: He does not complete it later. Rabbi Shimon, son of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, says: He completes it later. Bar Kappara said to Rabbi Shimon, son of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi: Granted, according to my position, that I say that Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi does not complete Shema later, that is why when he taught, Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi would specifically seek a topic that included the exodus from Egypt, as by so doing he fulfills the mitzva to remember the Exodus; a mitzva that others fulfill in their recitation of the last paragraph of Shema. But according to you, who says that he completes his recitation of Shema later, why, when he teaches, would he specifically seek a topic that included the exodus from Egypt?

Rabbi Shimon responded: Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi did so in order to mention the exodus from Egypt at its appointed time, during the time of the recitation of Shema.

Based on this halakha, Rabbi Ila, son of Rav Shmuel bar Marta, said in the name of Rav: One who recited the verse, “Hear, Israel, the Lord is our God, the Lord is One,” and was immediately overcome by sleep, fulfilled his obligation to recite Shema. Similarly, Rav Naḥman said to his slave, Daru: If you see that I have fallen asleep, bother me to recite the first verse, do not bother me to recite any more than that. Similarly, Rav Yosef said to Rav Yosef, son of Rabba: What would your father do? Rav Yosef, son of Rabba, said to him: He would exert himself not to fall asleep in order to recite the first verse, he would not exert himself to recite any more than that.

Rav Yosef said: One who is lying [perakdan] on his back may not recite Shema, for lying that way is unbecoming. The Gemara asks: Is that to say that one may not recite Shema in this position, but to sleep lying in that position is permissible? Didn’t Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi curse one who sleeps lying on his back?

The Gemara answers: If one lies on his back while leaning slightly to the side, it is permissible. Nonetheless, to recite Shema in this position, even though he is leaning, is prohibited.

The Gemara asks: Wouldn’t Rabbi Yoḥanan lie on his back, lean slightly and recite Shema?

The Gemara responds: The case of Rabbi Yoḥanan is different, because he was corpulent and it was difficult for him to read any other way.

The mishna cited Rabbi Meir’s statement: At the breaks between paragraphs, one may greet an individual due to the respect that he is obligated to show him, and may respond. And in the middle of each paragraph, one may greet an individual due to the fear that the individual may harm him if he fails do so, and may respond.

About this, the Gemara asks: He may respond due to what circumstance? If you say that one may respond due to respect; now that we learned that one may greet another due to respect, is it necessary to say that one may respond due to respect? Rather, it must be explained as follows: One may greet due to respect and respond with a greeting to any person. But if that is the case, say the latter clause of the mishna: In the middle of each paragraph one may greet due to fear and return another’s greeting due to fear.

Here too, it must be clarified: He may respond due to what circumstance? If you say that one may respond due to fear; now that we have learned that one may greet another due to fear, is it necessary to say that one may respond due to fear? Rather, it must mean that one may respond to another’s greeting even due to honor. If so, that is identical to the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda, as we learned in the mishna: In the middle of each paragraph, one may greet another due to fear and respond due to respect. At the breaks between paragraphs, one may greet another due to respect and respond with a greeting to any person. If so, what is the dispute between them?

The Gemara says: The mishna is incomplete; it is missing an important element, and it teaches the following: At the breaks between the paragraphs, one may greet due to respect, and, needless to say, he may respond due to respect. In the middle of each paragraph one may greet due to fear, and, needless to say, he may respond due to fear. This is the statement of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yehuda says: In the middle of each paragraph one may greet due to fear and respond due to respect.