Yerushalmi: The Yerushalmi extrapolates from here that the B'rachos are not crucial, and even if one failed to recite the two B'rachos before and after the Sh'ma one is nevertheless Yotzei; Otherwise, one could ask, what does the Mishnah mean when it says 'Im Keivan Libo, Yatza, seeing as he did not recite the B'rachos before the Sh'ma?

Question: But did we not conclude in the first Perek (12:) that 'the order of the B'rachos is not crucial', implying that the B'rachos themselves, are?

Answer: That Gemara is talking about the Tzibur ...

Proof: Which is implied by the statement there 'Amar lahem ha'Memuneh'.

Halachah #1: Rabeinu Sh'mayah rules that wherever talking is prohibited, one may not talk even in Lashon ha'Kodesh.

Proof: And so it is implied in our Mishnah.

Halachah #2: The Yerushalmi states that one is permitted to answer even in the middle of a Pasuk ...

Halachah #2 (cont.): Rav Huna in the name of Yosef commenting on the Pasuk "Vedibarta Bam" states that 'from here one has permission to speak in the middle of them'.

Conclusion: And this is also what the Gemara says in the first Perek of Yoma (19:) "Vedibarta Bam" - 'but not during the Amidah', meaning that one is not permitted to answer a greeting there even out of Kavod.

Explanation #1: Rashi explains that he does not have the intention to read it.

Question: So what if he doesn't, as long as he reads it?

Explanation #2: The explanation of 'Korei Lehagyah therefore is that he does not read the words according to the Halachah and according to the vowels, only by way of the actual letters, as he is only concerned to note the 'Chaseiros' and 'Yeseiros', such as "le'Tatpas" and "Mezuzas".

Explanation #2 (cont.): And when the Gemara says 've'Im Kivan Libo, this is 'La'av Davka', but that he was careful to read it correctly, according to the vowels and according to the Halachah.

Halachah: The Ri rules like the Chachamim ...

Reason #1: Because the Halachah is like Rebbi when he argues with his contemporary, but not when he argues with his contemporaries (Eruvin 46:).

Reason #2: Moreover, the Rabanan concur with the one who holds that someone who does not hear what he is saying, he is nevertheless Yotzei, and we Pasken like him later (on Daf 15:)

Explanation #1: Rashi explains in the second Perek of Megilah (Daf 17: & 18.) 'To read in the Torah'.

Refutation: This is not correct however, since it was Ezra who instituted K'ri'as ha'Torah, so what was "Sh'ma" coming to teach us before Ezra?

Explanation #2: The Gemara is therefore referring to those Parshiyos we are obligated to read min ha'Torah, such as Parshas Zachor and Parshas Parah.

Alternative: Or it is speaking about Mikra Bikurim, Viduy Ma'aser or the Parshah of Chalitzah, all of which the Torah obligates us to read.

Conclusion: Nevertheless, they were originally said in all languages at Sinai, because every command that emerged from the Mouth of Ha'Kadosh-Baruch-Hu, split up into seventy languages.

Clarification: Up to "be'Chol Me'odecha", since the first two Pesukim speak about unifying Hash-m's Name, loving Him and fearing Him.

Clarification: Because if it is like you said, the Torah ought to have written "asher Tzivisicha" (in the past tense); "Metzav'cha" implies even from now on (i.e. the Pesukim that follow).

Clarification (cont.): Nevertheless, the Torah needs to add "ha'Eileh", because wewould otherwise have thought that the second Parshah is also included.

Halachah: And this is the Halachah, since we Pasken like Rava, who is the latter opinion.

Clarification: The Yerushalmi explains that this does not mean that someone who is sitting must stand, but that someone who is walking must stand still.

Implied Question: Even though, according to Beis Hillel, everyone may recite the Sh'ma the way he is ...

Answer: Nevertheless, one should ideally stop walking, since someone who is walking is not as mentally settle, and is therefore unable to concentrate to the same extent as someone who is standing still.

Conclusion: And this is the Halachah, that if someone is walking it is a Mitzvah to stop for the first Pasuk since Kavanah is obligatory for the first Pasuk exclusively.

Support: The Tanchuma too, citing Rav Yehudah in the name of Shmuel, rules that that 'One is forbidden to take upon oneself the yoke of the Kingdom of Heaven whislt walking; one is obligated to stop and to continue on one's way only when one reaches 've'Ahavta'.

Halachah #1: When Rebbi Me'ir and Rebbi Yehudah argue, the Halachah is like Rebbi Yehudah, who rules that one may interrupt even in the middle of a Perek for Kavod.

Halachah #2: That being the case, one ought to be able to answer Kadish and Kedushah even in the middle of K'ri'as Sh'ma, since there is no more blatant case of 'Mipnei ha'Kavod' than this.

Halachah #3: It is not permitted to do so however, in the middle of the Amidah ...

Source: This is because it is implied later (inn Perek Ein Omdin, Daf 31.) that between Ge'ulah and Tefilah one is not permitted to answer, how much more so during the Amidah itself.

Halachah #4: Someone who is in the middle of the Amidah, and the Shatz reaches 'Modim' should bow down, but should not respond verbally.

Qualification: That only applies however, to where one is the middle of a B'rachah, but not to where he is at the end ...

Source: And we will say later (34.) that one is not allowed to bow down during any of the B'rachos, other than those that the Chachamim instituted.

Halachah #5: Rabeinu Tam used to wait by 'Oseh Pele', in order to answer Kadish and Kedushah with the Tzibur.

Reason: And he maintained that even if one waited for as long as it takes to finish the entire B'rachah, one does not need to say it again.