In the reuniting between Yaakov and Yosef, the passuk says: “He [Yosef] presented himself to him [Yaakov] and, embracing him around the neck, he [Yosef] wept on his neck a good while. (Bereishis 46:29)
Rashi takes note of the seemingly “one sided” embrace, since it says that the reason Yosef wept on Yaakov’s neck but Yaakov did not weep on Yosef’s neck? Rashi brings an interpretation from “our Rabbis” that at that time Yaakov was busy saying Krias Shema (the twice daily obligation to recite Shema) and therefore he didn’t engage in hugging his son.
Now, we can’t question Yaakov’s timing of things, but it would seem to be a quite inconvenient time to say Shema, right when he was about to reconvene with his son? Why did he choose to say Shema right then and there?
This question leads some meforshim to explain this interpretation with a “mussar” approach, that Yaakov had surely said Krias Shema earlier that day, but upon meeting his long lost son, he was saying the verses of Krias Shema in order to transmute the tremendous love he felt for Yosef and directed it towards Hashem.
(It’s reported that when the Brisker Rav heard this above explanation of the Medrash he was nonplussed - “You’re taking Yaakov Avinu and and transforming into the person saying this vort, and then saying this vort! - Yaakov Avinu’s love for his son wasn’t independent from his love towards Hashem - even his love for his son was love for Hashem!”)
However, when I looked into the source of this interpretation,(Teshuvos Geonim and in Midrash Aggadah) from the verbiage used there, I’m convinced that Yaakov wasn’t just “saying” Shema, but instead he was actually engaged in fulfilling his twice daily mitzvah.
(As to the question as to why he decided to say it specifically then, Rav Chaim Brisker has an explanation in, Haggadah Shel Pesach Beis HaLevi Kovetz Hosafos, ayin sham)
I was thinking, that according to the second approach, that Yaakov was saying Shema as part of his obligation, it makes sense why he didn’t weep on Yosef’s shoulders or seemingly make any gesture to acknowledge his presence, since the laws of Krias Shema strictly prohibit engaging in other things during its recitation.
For example, during the first sentence of Shema, the Shulchan Aruch (O.C. 66:1) says: “And one may respond to a greeting from an honored person, even in the middle of a verse, except for the verse of "Shema Yisrael" and "Baruch shem, during which one may not interrupt at all unless it is out of fear that he will be killed.”
(Similarly, regarding the recitation of the first paragraph of Shema, the Shulchan Aruch (O.C. 63:6) says: One who is [in the middle of] reciting the Sh'ma should not signal with one's eyes, mouth with one's lips, or gesture with one's fingers during the first paragraph which is the main acceptance of the yoke of the Kingdom of Heaven because he [then] appears like he's reading it casually.)
Now, according to the explanation that Yaakov was in middle of fulfilling his obligation to recite Shema, it makes sense that he was keeping to the laws of Shema not to interrupt (or even make a gesture), but according to the explanation that Yaakov was just saying Shema as a “vehicle” to transmute his emotions to Hashem, why didn’t he interrupt, or at least give a “one second” signal to acknowledge Yosef?
Perhaps the answer to this is dependent on a chakira (an examination into the core essence of a matter) as to why one may not interrupt the first sentence of Krias Shema: (I saw this chakra brought in Parperes HaTorah)
One possibility is that in order for one to discharge his obligation, he needs to have full concentration, and lacking that fullness, he doesn’t discharge his obligation.
The other possibility is that this sentence is the essence of accepting the yolk of Hashem, and it is therefore inappropriate to address a human being during that time.
(Parperes HaTorah says that the Mishna Berura (O.C. 66:1 s.k. 11) seems to lean towards the latter approach: שאין דבר גדול כקבלת מלכות שמים)
So, in regards to Yaakov and our discussion, if we understand like the side of the chakira that interrupting during Shema is an issue because it is disrespectful towards Hashem, then it is not difficult to understand why even if he was saying Shema a second time for “personal” agenda, that he kept the same attitude, because he was, nevertheless, accepting Hashem’s yolk, and it is inappropriate to greet another person at that time.
This chakira into the reason behind the law not to interrupt during Shema and how it applied to Yaakov Avinu could play out in a similar sense in our day and age too. Sometimes if a person is davening at a late minyan, they need say Shema earlier in davening in order to be within the zman, and the Shema they say with the tzibbur is just like reading pesukim from the Torah.
In that circumstance, does one need to be careful with the laws of reciting the Shema, such as not interrupting at all during the first sentence?
I asked this to Rav Akiva Meister shlita, and he said that one should treat this second recitation with the regular laws of Shema, even though one isn’t fulfilling his obligation with it.
Sources and Endnotes:
(ג) ויבך על צואריו עוד. לְשׁוֹן הַרְבּוֹת בְּכִיָּה, וְכֵן כִּי לֹא עַל אִישׁ יָשִׂים עוֹד (איוב ל"ד), לְשׁוֹן רִבּוּי הוּא – אֵינוֹ שָׂם עָלָיו עֲלִילוֹת נוֹסָפוֹת עַל חֲטָאָיו; אַף כָּאן הִרְבָּה וְהוֹסִיף בִּבְכִי יוֹתֵר עַל הָרָגִיל; אֲבָל יַעֲקֹב לֹא נָפַל עַל צַוְּארֵי יוֹסֵף וְלֹא נְשָׁקוֹ, וְאָמְרוּ רַבּוֹתֵינוּ, שֶׁהָיָה קוֹרֵא אֶת שְׁמַע:
(3) ויבך על צואריו עוד AND WEPT ON HIS NECK A GOOD WHILE — The phrase ויבך עוד signifies weeping copiously. So, too, עוד has the same meaning in (Job 34:23) “For He doth not place upon a man עוד” — which means something more than is proper: God does not place on him accusations additional to his sins (the sins he has really committed) Here, also, he wept greatly and continuously — more than is usual. Jacob, however, did not fall upon Joseph’s neck nor did he kiss him. Our Rabbis say: the reason was that he was reciting the Shema.
(א) באיזה מקום יכול להפסיק ובאיזה מקום לא יפסיק. ובו י סעיפים:
בין הפרקים שואל בשלום אדם נכבד ומשיב שלום לכל אדם ובאמצע שואל בשלום מי שהוא ירא ממנו כגון אביו או רבו או מי שהוא גדול ממנו בחכמה וכ"ש מלך או אנס ומשיב שלום לאדם נכבד ואפי' באמצע הפסוק חוץ מפסוק שמע ישראל ובשכמל"ו שלא יפסיק בהם כלל אם לא מפני מי שירא שמא יהרגנו:
(1) [The Laws Regarding] In Which Place One May Interrupt and in Which Place One May Not Interrupt. Containing 10 Se-ifim
Between the sections [of Shema or it's blessings], one may greet an honored person and respond to a greeting from any person. And in the middle [of a section], one may greet someone that one reveres, such as one's father, one's teacher, or one greater than oneself in wisdom, and all the more so a king or one who compels. And one may respond to a greeting from an honored person, even in the middle of a verse, except for the verse of "Sh'ma Yisrael" and "Baruch shem kavod malchuto l'olam va-ed", during which one may not interrupt at all unless it is out of fear that he will be killed.
(ו) הקורא קריאת שמע לא ירמוז בעיניו ולא יקרוץ בשפתיו ולא יראה באצבעותיו בפרשה ראשונ' שהוא עיקר קבלת עול מלכות שמים מפני שנראה כקורא עראי וכתיב ודברת בם ודרשינן עשה אותם קבע:
(6) One who is [in the middle of] reciting the Sh'ma should not signal with one's eyes, mouth with one's lips, or gesture with one's fingers during the first paragraph which is the main acceptance of the yoke of the Kingdom of Heaven because he [then] appears like he's reading it casually, and it is written "and you shall speak of them...", and we explain [this to mean]: do them permanently (ie. speak them in a formal/non-casual way).
Excerpt from Parperes Moshe:
I also wanted to clarify that the Halacha not to interupt during the first passuk and the Halacha not to motion to someone etc. during Shema are totally different sugyos.
It is interesting however, that some meforshim bring the story of Yaakov as a proof to the former Halacha, and some to the latter. The Gra (brought in Biur Halacha) brings a proof from Yaakov to the din not to interupt during the first passuk:
(ד) חוץ כו'. כ"מ בשם רמ"ך שכ"ה בירושלמי וז"ש בפ' ויפול יוסף כו' שיעקב היה מקבל עמ"ש אז:
However, Maharsha (to Yoma 19a, the Talmudic source for the Halacha in 63:6) brings a proof from Yaakov to the din not to motion to someone during Shema, ayin sham.
Just to show just how different these two halachos are in nature, if a person doesn't have proper kavanna during the first passuk, even if he completes it fully with pirush hamilos, however, if he "interupted" with outside thoughts, he is only yotzei bidieved. The Biur Halacha has a safek, depending on the correct understanding of the Rashba, that it is possible one isn't yotzei at all! (See Aromimcha Elokai HaMelech, Pesicha where he discusses this at length)
However, so such discussion is had in regards to the halacha of motioning to someone during the first parsha of Shema, of it potentially making you not be yotzei or only yotzei Krias Shema bidieved.
In regards to the chakira about kavanna during the first passuk, the first tzad, I saw the Minchas Asher (Parshas Vayigash, Siman 92, ois 5) who brings this idea in regards to answering Amen Yehei Shmeih Rabba during Shema, that one who is reading Shema not to be yotzei his obligation would be allowed to answer according to all shittos. Ayin sham, baarichus.