Clarification: Rashi explains that his countenance wallows in the dust (See Iyov,16:15), and it is therefore not befitting to place the glory (Tefilin) in place of dust.

Question: Why do we need this reason? Why not give the reason based on the fact that Hash-m said to Yechezkel "Put on your glory!", implying that for anyone else it is forbidden?

Answer #1: The Count from Coucy answers that Rashi's reason is necessary, either so as not to learn other Mitzvos from Tefilin with a 'Kal va'Chomer'.

Answer #2: Or to obligate an Aveil to wear Tefilin after the first day, since 'his countenance wallows in the dust' only applies to the first day.

Question: Why is it not obvious that the Halachah is not like them?

Answer: Since Beis Shamai is more strict than Beis Hillel, the question 'P'shita' is not applicable, because when Chazal say that 'Whoever does like Beis Shamai has done nothing', that is only where Beis Shamai is more lenient that Beis Hillel ...

Answer (cont.): But here, with regard to Keri'as Shema, Beis Hillel do not disqualify the opinion of Beis Shamai.

Question: In that case, why does the Gemara bring a proof from Sukah where it says 'You never kept the Mitzvah of Sukah throughout your life!',and which Rashi explains to mean that just as whoever did like Beis Hillel, did nothing according to Beis Shamai, so too, someone who does like Beis Shamai has done nothing according to Beis Hillel'?

Question (cont.): What sort of comparison is that, seeing as there Beis Shamai disqualifies completely what Beis Hillel permit, whereas here someone who reads the Shema like Beis Shamai has fulfilled the Mitzvah, according to Beis Hillel?

New Explanation: Therefore ha'Rav Rav Shemayah explains the comparison there like this: Since Beis Shamai said there 'You did not fulfill ... ', even though strictly speaking, bearing in mind that his head and most of his body was in the Sukah, he ought to have been Yotzei, and it is only due to a decree in case he is drawn after his table ...

New Explanation (cont.): The same should apply to Keri'as Shema, in that although strictly speaking, one ought to be Yotzei Bedi'eved...

Conclusion: Nevertheless, since, according to Beis Hillel it is not the right thing to do (as we learned in the Mishnah 'You deserve whatever happens to you!'), consequently, if one does like Beis Shamai, according to Beis Hillel he did nothing (See Tosfos Sukah Daf 3. DH de'Amar').

Explanation #1: Rashi definesa long B'rachah as 'Emes ve'Emunah' and a short one as 'Hashkiveinu'.

Question: 'Hashkiveinu' is a long B'rachah, too?

Proof #1: Proof for this is the fact that the Tosefta does not list it among the short ones.

Proof #2: Furthermore, there are times that it becomes very long, such as for example,on the eve of Yom Henef (the second night of Pesach).

Proof #3: Moreover, it turns out very often that 'Emes ve'Emunah' is very short, like the Gemara will say later (in the second Perek, 14:) according to the opinion that one does not say Parshas Tzitzis at night, where one says instead 'Modim Anachnu Lach, she'Hotzeisanu mi'Mitzrayim ... '.

Explanation #2: It therefore seems to Rabeinu Tam, that everything refers to 'Emes ve'Emunah' - 'whether it is long or whether it is short',meaning whether one says a short version of it, or a long version, as we will learn later.

Precedent: Like we find in Yevamos (Daf 1.) 'whether they are betrothed or married, whether they are virgins or whether they are 'Be'ulos' (SeeTosfos ha'Rosh).

Clarification: Such as the B'rachah over fruit and over Mitzvos, one is not allowed to recite a long B'rachah.

Halachah: Therefore they instituted to say 'Ahavah Rabah' in the morning, and 'Ahavas Olam' at night.

Yerushalmi: The Yerushalmi states that when we say that 'one has already been Yotzei with 'Ahavah Rabah' that is on condition that one learns immediately - straightaway, there where he is.

Question: They asked Rav Yitzchak what about us, who do not learn straight after Shachris, because we are under pressure to go to work and do not manage to learn until close to mid-dy or even later. Why do we then not recite Birchas ha'Torah again when we settle down to learn?

Answer #1: The Ri replied that we do not rule like that Yerushalmi, since our Gemara does not mention it ...

Answer #1 (cont.): Consequently, we are not obligated to learn on the spot.

Answer #2: Moreover, even according to the Yerushalmi, it is only 'Ahavah Rabah', which is not the main B'rachah of Birchas ha'Torah (since it was instituted first and foremost as a B'rachah that precedes the Shema), that because of it one is not Yotzei unless one learns immediately after reciting it, and does not take one's mind off it (before learning).

Answer #2 (cont.): But the B'rachah of ' ... asher Bachar banu' and that of 'La'asok be'Divrei Torah, which are the official B'rachos of Torah, cover a person all day.

Question: Why is this any different than Sukah, over which one needs torecite a B'rachah 'Leishev ba'Sukah' before each meal?

Answer: Torah is different, in that one does not take one's mind off it completely, since the obligation to learn is constant, as the Torah writes (in Yehoshua) " ...and you shall study it by day and by night".

Answer (cont.): And it is like sitting all day in the Sukah without a break.

Answer (cont.): Whereas eating in a Sukah has fixed times.

Question: Why do we not recite a B'rachah over sleeping in the Sukah?

Answer #1: Because the B'rachah over eating covers sleeping too.

Answer #2: Alternatively, because of the possibility that one is unable to fall asleep, seeing it does not lie in one's hands to do so at will.

Halachah: Rabeinu Tam used to say that when a person gets up from bed during the night to learn, he does not need to recite Birchas ha'Torah, since the Birchas ha'Torah of the previous morning covers the entire period until the following morning.

Rejection: This is not however, correct.

Minhag: The Tzorfatim have the Minhag to recite Pesukim and Birchas Kohanim, as well as the Mishnah in the first Perek of Pe'ah 'Eilu Devarim she'Ein lahem Shi'ur',plus the Beraisa cited in Shabbos (127.) 'Eilu Devarim she'Adam Ochel Peiroseiham'.

Source: This is based on the above-mentioned Yerushalmi, that requires one to learn immediately.

Conclusion: This is not however, necessary, as Tosfos mentioned earlier.

Text: But we do not have the text 'Lamdeini Chukecha' ...

Reason: Seeing as it is not a B'rachah, but a request said by David ha'Melech(in Tehilim 119:12).

Clarification: This does not refer to the Duchan, since the Kohanim did not go up to the Duchan until after the burning of the limbs (on the Mizbe'ach),as we learned in Tamid.

Proof: And we say in Ta'anis (Daf 26:) 'Thre times a day the Kohanim raised their hands ... '. And had the current case referred to the Duchan, it ought to have listed four, one before the burning, and one after it.

Conclusion: They must have therefore recited Birchas Kohanim without raising their hands, in the manner that we do.