3:
Our mishnah distinguishes between two categories of berakhah: long and short. The first b^erakhah in the morning, Yotzer Or [Creator of light] is defined as being long, the second Ahavah Rabbah is defined as being short; the b^erakhah after the Shema in the morning, Emet V^eyatziv, is defined as being short. The same definitions apply to the Evening Shema. Even the most cursory glance at the text of these b^erakhot in the siddur [prayer-book] will indicate that the terminology 'long' and 'short' has nothing to do with the actual actual length, in words, of these b^erakhot. For example, in both the morning and the evening the first b^erakhah after the Shema is quite long in terms of word count, even though it is defined as a 'short' one; the first and last b^erakhot in the evening are both defined as 'long' [but see #5 below] and yet their combined length (in words) is shorter than either Emet Ve-emunah or Emet V^e-yatziv, in the morning and evening respectively.

4:
The designation 'long' is a technical term merely indicating that the b^erakhah must start with the liturgical formula Barukh attah Adonai Eloheynu Melekh ha-Olam and that it must also conclude with the formula Barukh attah Adonai... Conversely, a 'short' b^erakhah has no introductory formula and only concludes with Barukh attah Adonai... (A liturgical text that does not contain either of these formulae is, technically speaking, not a b^erakhah.) If we take the Evening Shema as our example, perusal of the siddur will reveal that the first b^erakhah [Ma'ariv Aravim] is, indeed, 'long' in that it both starts and concludes with the liturgical formula; the second b^erakhah [Ahavat Olam] is 'short' because it only concludes with the formula; this is true of the first b^erakhah after the Shema, Emet ve-Emunah, despite its length in actual words: only at its conclusion does it contain the b^erakhah Barukh attah Adonai Ga'al Yisra'el [... Israel's Redeemer]. Pay no attention to the way your siddur breaks the b^erakhah into paragraphs: from the liturgical point of view it's one b^erakhah

. 5:
The last b^erakhah, Hashkivenu would seem to be an exception: the mishnah seems to suggest that it should be 'long' ["and two after it - one long and one short"], but in fact it is short - it only ends with the required formula. This may well be a problem of translation. My translation of the mishnah is based upon the explanation of Rashi, which certainly fits the words. However, as his own grandson Rabbenu Tam points out, it may fit the words but it doesn't fit the facts! Rabbenu Tam suggests that a better rendition of the text of the mishnah would be: "In the morning two blessings are to be made before it and one after it; in the evening there are two before it and two after it; some of these are long and some of these are short." While at first reading this might seem like a very strained interpretation, it does fit the facts, and very often in mishnaic Hebrew the phrase aĥat A v^e-aĥat B means "both A and B" or "either A or B".

To be continued.

This is the continuation of Ed Frankel's account of his experience in practical teaching:

The experiment worked, but it raised halakhic difficulties.

1. Not all distinguish between white and blue or between blue and green at same level of light. Discrepancies ranged over a matter of seconds, but the increase of light in school was far faster than might be the increase of sunlight on any day. Would it seem likely, which I doubt, that the time for saying Shema may differ from person to person?



2. If times for saying Shema differ from person to person, rather than offering a specific time for saying Shema, the mishna seems to suggest a method by determining when Shema can be said. At the very least, this would muddy the waters. As to the seifa I believe the issue is not only one of how early Shema can be stated, but also one of haĥmatsat mitzvah [missing out on a mitzvah]. How late can a Jew put off the morning Shema? In the talmudic discourse on the topic, it seems that there is far greater interest on how early one can begin, and even recognizing that some "hasidim" were particularly punctilious about it. The talmudic discourse, however, ignores the issue of royalty's habits of sleeping in. Might this because the idea of hachmatzat mitzvah was so out of sync with normal life, particularly given the discussion of saying evening Shema as promptly as one can?

Next Shiur