16,374
edits
Muktzeh Machmat Gufo: Difference between revisions
From Halachipedia
no edit summary
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
{{Okay}} | {{Okay}} | ||
An object that has no use on [[Shabbat]], such as a rock, stick, or money is considered Muktzeh Machmat Gufo. Any object in this category may not be moved on [[Shabbat]] even for a permitted use or the use of its place. <Ref> The Gemara ([[Shabbat]] 124a) explains that wood chips may not be moved on [[Shabbat]] even for a permitted use or for the use of its place because it lacks the designation of a Kli (vessel). Rambam ([[Shabbat]] 25:6) rules that anything which doesn’t have the status of a vessel such as a rock, stick, or money is considered [[Muktzeh]]. The Beit Yosef (Introduction to 308) and Mishna Brurah (308:34). agree. The Beit Yosef 308:7 infers from the Rambam and Tur that one may not move Muktzeh Machmat Gufo even for a permitted use or the use of its place. Mishna Brurah 308:34 agrees. | An object that has no use on [[Shabbat]], such as a rock, stick, or money is considered Muktzeh Machmat Gufo. Any object in this category may not be moved on [[Shabbat]] even for a permitted use or the use of its place. <Ref> The Gemara ([[Shabbat]] 124a) explains that wood chips may not be moved on [[Shabbat]] even for a permitted use or for the use of its place because it lacks the designation of a Kli (vessel). Rambam ([[Shabbat]] 25:6) rules that anything which doesn’t have the status of a vessel such as a rock, stick, or money is considered [[Muktzeh]]. The Beit Yosef (Introduction to 308) and Mishna Brurah (308:34). agree. The Beit Yosef 308:7 infers from the Rambam and Tur that one may not move Muktzeh Machmat Gufo even for a permitted use or the use of its place. Mishna Brurah 308:34 agrees. | ||
* Rav Hershel Schachter (“Hilchot Muktze,” min 7-9) explains that in general the laws of [[Muktzeh]] apply to anything that isn’t included in the four main categories of things that are susceptible to Tumah and Tahara, which are people, vessels, food, and drinks. He qualifies that the precise definition of a vessel in terms of [[Muktzeh]] is not the same as it is for Tumah. Although Rabbi Simcha Bunim Cohen in [[Muktzeh]]: A Practical Guide (p. 26-8) doesn’t come to any conclusion about the definition of a vessel for [[Muktzeh]], he implies that in general it means an item that people consider usable. | * Rav Hershel Schachter (“Hilchot Muktze,” min 7-9) explains that in general the laws of [[Muktzeh]] apply to anything that isn’t included in the four main categories of things that are susceptible to Tumah and Tahara, which are people, vessels, food, and drinks. He qualifies that the precise definition of a vessel in terms of [[Muktzeh]] is not the same as it is for Tumah. Although Rabbi Simcha Bunim Cohen in [[Muktzeh]]: A Practical Guide (p. 26-8) doesn’t come to any conclusion about the definition of a vessel for [[Muktzeh]], he implies that in general it means an item that people consider usable.</ref> <ref>Why are rocks muktzeh? | ||
* The Chayei Adam 66:1 implies that rocks are muktzeh because you need to prepare everything to be used for Shabbat use (Beitzah 2b) and rocks aren’t prepared. If so, why can’t you prepare it with designation for one Shabbat? Perhaps it isn’t a good preparation if it is an abnormal preparation. Mishna Brurah 310:16 might agree. | |||
* The Kehilat Yakov Beitzah siman 4 explains that rocks aren’t muktzeh because they aren’t a useful item, they aren’t a food or a kli. Even if they were prepared they are muktzeh unless they are converted into something useful. His proof is that rocks aren’t permitted with a designation for one Shabbat for abnormal uses. | |||
* What are differences between these approaches? | |||
**Can you can designate a rock in the middle of Shabbat to be useful? Mishna Brurah 259:5 writes that the designation to use something is only effective before Shabbat. However, Rav Nevinsal in Byitzchak Yikareh 259:5 argues that in terms of muktzeh it is permitted, however, he considers it makeh bpatish. He cites that Rabbi Akiva Eiger Shabbat 24:180 is a proof for him unlike Chazon Ish 44:14. According to the Chayei Adam you might conclude like the Mishna Brurah since there’s migo d’ikasay. According to the Kehilat Yakov you might conclude like Rav Nevinsal since it is now usable. | |||
**Does designation for one Shabbat work for everything? Most rishonim and achronim assume it is ineffective for things that abnormal to use or for abnormal uses. However, the Rama 308:21 cites the Mordechai who says that even for abnormal uses designation for one Shabbat is effective. According to the Chayei Adam this leniency is reasonable. According to the Kehilat Yakov you would reject this leniency. </ref> | |||
==Muktzeh Machmat Gufo== | ==Muktzeh Machmat Gufo== | ||
