Bitel Kli Mehechano: Difference between revisions
From Halachipedia
m (Text replace - "Tefillin " to "Tefillin ") |
m (Text replace - "==References==" to "==Sources==") |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
# Therefore, it's forbidden to place a container underneath a dripping wax because the wax is muktzah and falling into the container will make the container muktzah. <ref>S"A 265:3 </ref> | # Therefore, it's forbidden to place a container underneath a dripping wax because the wax is muktzah and falling into the container will make the container muktzah. <ref>S"A 265:3 </ref> | ||
# It is permissible to remove a talit from the [[Tefillin]] bag because one is not actively ruining the use of the [[Tefillin]] bag and some are strict to put a siddur in the bag before removing the Talit. <ref> Yalkut Yosef ([[Shabbat]], vol 2 pg 357, 482, and 641) rules that even according to those who hold that [[Tefillin]] is Muktzeh it is permissible to remove a talit from the [[Tefillin]] bag because one is not actively ruining the use of the [[Tefillin]] bag and some are strict to put a siddur in the bag before removing the Talit. In the footnote there he writes that there are several reasons to be lenient; he writes that based on the מאירי there’s no prohibition of Mevatel Kli Mehechano when it’s only done passively. Additionally, it’s questionable whether [[Tefillin]] are mutkzah and even if they are it’s questionable whether the prohibition of Mevatel Kli Mehechano applies to Kli Sh’Melachto LeIssur (or only Muktzeh Machmat Gufo). He doesn’t explain the reason for those who are strict in the footnote. </ref> | # It is permissible to remove a talit from the [[Tefillin]] bag because one is not actively ruining the use of the [[Tefillin]] bag and some are strict to put a siddur in the bag before removing the Talit. <ref> Yalkut Yosef ([[Shabbat]], vol 2 pg 357, 482, and 641) rules that even according to those who hold that [[Tefillin]] is Muktzeh it is permissible to remove a talit from the [[Tefillin]] bag because one is not actively ruining the use of the [[Tefillin]] bag and some are strict to put a siddur in the bag before removing the Talit. In the footnote there he writes that there are several reasons to be lenient; he writes that based on the מאירי there’s no prohibition of Mevatel Kli Mehechano when it’s only done passively. Additionally, it’s questionable whether [[Tefillin]] are mutkzah and even if they are it’s questionable whether the prohibition of Mevatel Kli Mehechano applies to Kli Sh’Melachto LeIssur (or only Muktzeh Machmat Gufo). He doesn’t explain the reason for those who are strict in the footnote. </ref> | ||
== | ==Sources== | ||
<references/> | <references/> | ||
Revision as of 01:27, 17 March 2013
- It's forbidden to make a usable vessel into muktzah so that it forbidden to move on Shabbat because it's similar to breaking the vessel on Shabbat. [1]
- Therefore, it's forbidden to place a container underneath a dripping wax because the wax is muktzah and falling into the container will make the container muktzah. [2]
- It is permissible to remove a talit from the Tefillin bag because one is not actively ruining the use of the Tefillin bag and some are strict to put a siddur in the bag before removing the Talit. [3]
Sources
- ↑ Shulchan Aruch 310:6 rules that it’s forbidden to put a vessel underneath a Muktzeh item which will fall into the vessel because one is effectively ruining the usability of the vessel on Shabbat (Mevatel Kli Mehechano). The Mishna Brurah 310:20 (quoting the Tur) writes that the prohibition involved is that it’s similar to breaking a vessel on Shabbat. Mishna Brurah 265:6 adds that it depends on whether the vessel remains Muktzeh afterwards or not.
- ↑ S"A 265:3
- ↑ Yalkut Yosef (Shabbat, vol 2 pg 357, 482, and 641) rules that even according to those who hold that Tefillin is Muktzeh it is permissible to remove a talit from the Tefillin bag because one is not actively ruining the use of the Tefillin bag and some are strict to put a siddur in the bag before removing the Talit. In the footnote there he writes that there are several reasons to be lenient; he writes that based on the מאירי there’s no prohibition of Mevatel Kli Mehechano when it’s only done passively. Additionally, it’s questionable whether Tefillin are mutkzah and even if they are it’s questionable whether the prohibition of Mevatel Kli Mehechano applies to Kli Sh’Melachto LeIssur (or only Muktzeh Machmat Gufo). He doesn’t explain the reason for those who are strict in the footnote.
