Halachipedia - User contributions [en]

Muktzeh Machmat Gufo

2023-10-18T18:45:31Z

Checht05: /* Sources */

[[Image:Rocks.jpg|right]]
{{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.

*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 are 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. Shaar Hatziyun 310:10 implies the same.
*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==

===Rules===

#Muktzeh Machmat Gufo may not be moved even if one needs the object or it’s place is needed. <ref>Rama 308:7 </ref>
#It’s permitted to move a severe [[Muktzeh]] item for any of the follow reasons:
##item is foul-smelling or disgusting
##item is a safety hazard
##item is at risk of being stolen
##for human dignity

===Examples===

*animals <ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 308:39 </ref>
*bars of soap <ref>*[http://www.torah.org/advanced/weekly-halacha/5763/shemos.html Rabbi Doniel Neustadt], Sh”t Igrot Moshe 5:22(15), and Rav Elyashiv in Shalmei Yehuda (pg 158) all consider a bar of soap to be Muktzeh Machmat Gufo being that it is an item without any permitted use on Shabbat. Rav Ovadia Yosef in Sh"t Yechave Daat 2:50 allows permits its use.
*Shemirat Shabbat Kihilchita 20:16 holds that it is only a [[kli shemelachto li'isur]]. Nevertheless, he recommends to be strict and consider it Muktzeh Machmat Gufo. In the footnote (n. 44) he cites Rav Shlomo Zalman who seems to lean in favor of considering bar soap to be Muktzeh Machmat Gufo. His logic is as follows: There's a dispute Magen Avraham and Eliyah Rabba about an unlit wax candle. Magen Avraham says it is a Kli Shemelachto Leissur since it is usable item six days a week and its use on Shabbat is forbidden. However, the Eliyah Rabba says that it isn't a kli at all since its entire use on Shabbat is asur and isn't considered a functional kli. Mishna Brurah 308:34 is lenient. Shemirat Shabbat says he thinks it is comparable to that case - if so, the din would be that soap is kli shemelachto leissur. However, Rav Shlomo Zalman said its not the same because you can benefit from candles, so perhaps it is somewhat like a functional kli on shabbat, whereas bar soap is totally useless on shabbat. He then seems to compare it to shofar which he also considers to be completely muktzeh nowadays that people don't think from it and is completely useless on shabbat as it is forbidden to blow into it (see Shemirat Shabbat KeHilchata (28 n. 82)).</ref>
*battery <ref>Shalmei Yehuda (pg 61) quoting Rav Elyashiv says that batteries are considered Muktzeh Machmat Gufo and in extenuating circumstances can be considered [[Kli Sh’Melachto LeIssur]] </ref>
*bicycles <ref>Sefer Tiltulei [[Shabbat]] (pg 24) in name of Rav Moshe Feinstein </ref>
*board of wood <ref>Magen Avraham 308:18, Mishna Brurah 308:34 writes that many people aren’t aware of this prohibition to use a board to lock the door or another purpose unless it was designated permanently or made some action to fix it before [[Shabbat]]. </ref>
*bricks for construction.<ref>Gemara Shabbat 124b and Beitzah 31b establishes that construction bricks are muktzeh but leftover bricks aren’t muktzeh because you can sit on them. This is codified by Shulchan Aruch O.C. 308:17. Magen Avraham 308:35 explains that it is a kli when it is leftover because you can sit on it. In 308:36 he writes that when it is designated for construction it isn’t a kli and is like a rock. Mishna Brurah 308:73-74 elaborates on this. This could be the opinion of Rashi and Rabbenu Chananel 124b. However, see Ritva 124b s.v. hani who writes that the construction bricks are muktzeh since the owner doesn’t want them to be moved and break ([[muktzeh machmat chisaron kis]]). Rav Nevinsal in Byitzchak Yikareh 308:17 isn’t sure if this rule that bricks can be sat upon is applicable today.</ref>
*cameras <ref>The Weekly Halacha Discussion (vol 2 pg 337) </ref>
*coins <ref>Mishna Brurah (Intro to 308) </ref>
*corpse <ref>Mishna Brurah (Intro to 308) </ref>
*detergent <ref>The Weekly Halacha Discussion (vol 2 pg 337) </ref>
*dirt <ref>Mishna Brurah (Intro to 308) </ref>
*eye-shadow <ref>The Weekly Halacha Discussion (vol 2 pg 337) </ref>
*feces<ref>Is soeh of a person muktzeh? Gemara Shabbat 121b explicates that human feces aren’t muktzeh since it is edible to dogs. However, the Rif 45b, Rosh 16:11, and Rambam don’t cite this leniency. Therefore, the Ran, Ritva, and Rashba conclude that it is muktzeh since they don’t cite this part of the gemara. Shulchan Aruch O.C. 308:34 is strict. Magen Avraham 308:59 notes that these rishonim don’t cite our version of the gemara. Why would the Rif and Rosh hold it isn’t muktzeh? Rashba 121b s.v. hachi explains that it is muktzeh as nolad. Ritva Meyuchas Lran 121b s.v. soeh explains that since it isn’t certain that a person is going to go to the bathroom on Shabbat it is nolad. Ritva 121b s.v. girsat explains that even if it is certain it is still completely nolad. Levush cited by the Pri Megadim E”A 308:59 explains that it is completely miyus and wouldn’t give it to the dogs either way.</ref>
*flour <ref>The Weekly Halacha Discussion (vol 2 pg 337) </ref>
*glue <ref>The Weekly Halacha Discussion (vol 2 pg 337) </ref>
*insecticides <ref>Shalmei Yehuda (pg 164), Menuchat [[Shabbat]] 88:7, Brit Olam (Muktzeh Machmat Gufo#33), Sefer Tiltulei [[Shabbat]] (pg 30) </ref>
*lantern (metal) <ref>Magen Avraham 308:18, Mishna Brurah 308:34 </ref>
*light bulbs <ref>The Weekly Halacha Discussion (vol 2 pg 337) </ref>
*light switch <ref>*Or Zaruah 2:33 writes that moving something attached to a house is considered tiltul min hasad. Rama 265:3 cites this. Biur Halacha explains that this is a leniency in hilchot muktzeh unlike the Magen Avraham who explains that it is a bosis for muktzeh and non-muktzeh. Tosefet Shabbat 265:6 agrees to be lenient. Rav Ovadia explains that there's no muktzeh bmechubar since it is only a gezerah of hotzah and you can't do hotzah on something mechubar. Lev Yehuda 16, Piskei Teshuva 303, Bet Yehuda 1:11, Nahar Shalom 336:2 are lenient for all muktzeh that is attached to the ground. Shulchan Aruch Harav 336 is strict. Kriyat Chana Dovid 2:56 machmir unless eino mitchaven
*Tzitz Eliezer 9:23, Levushei Mordechai 3:25, Chelkat Yakov 1:58, Minchat Yitzchak 1:58, 2:110, 3:138, Shaalei Tzion 1:23, Yerushat Pelta 17, Kochvei Yitzchak 1:18:6, Betzel Chachma 2:32:9, Minchat Shlomo 1:10 p. 78 fnt., Az Nidbaru 1:76, 3:38, and Ish Matzliach 1:32 are strict because of muktzeh. Chelkat Yakov says tzorech gufo doesn't help since a switch doesn't have torat kli. Minchat Yitzchak explains that it is muktzeh machmat isur since moving it would be asur during ben hashemashot.
*Teshurat Shay 2:179, Mayim Chaim 94, 96, Tevuot Shemesh 57, Orach Mishpat 67, Mekor Chaim v. 3 p. 308 citing Rav Tzvi Pesach Frank, and Tefilah LMoshe 2:20 are lenient.
*Yalkut Yosef 216 fnt. 5 writes that Rav Ovadia Yosef held that moving a button switch isn't muktzeh since it is attached to the ground. [https://www.torahanytime.com/#/lectures?v=86025 Rav Yitzchak Yosef (Motzei Shabbat Korach 5779)] explained that switches aren’t muktzeh because they’re attached to the ground and it is only tiltul bmiksat. Yalkut Yosef Shabbat 2 308:3 Haarot n. 33 cites the letter of Rav Ovadia to this effect.</ref>
*[[lulav]] <ref>Mishna Brurah 308:25 </ref>
*mascara <ref>The Weekly Halacha Discussion (vol 2 pg 337) </ref>
*money <ref>The Weekly Halacha Discussion (vol 2 pg 337) </ref>
*nutshells <ref>The Weekly Halacha Discussion (vol 2 pg 337) </ref>
*plastic tablecloth rolls <ref>Shalmei Yehuda (pg 98) rules that since a roll of plastic tablecloth roll is unusable and it’s forbidden to rip it on [[Shabbat]] the roll is totally Muktzeh Machmat Gufo. </ref>
*raw barley <ref>The Weekly Halacha Discussion (vol 2 pg 337) </ref>
*radiator<ref>Orchot Shabbos ch 19 fnt 246, Avnei Yishfeh 6:51:1, and Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Shulchan Shlomo 308:13 fnt 34) hold that radiators are muktzeh machmat gufo since they contain wires that get red hot and are like a candle which is completely muktzeh since it is a bosis to the flame. 39 Melachos v. 1 p. 51, however, based on Igrot Moshe 3:49 and 4:51:5 is lenient to consider a radiator a kli shemelachto lisur. See Shalmei Yehuda 2:19 who seems to hold it is a muktzeh machmat chesron kis.</ref>
*rock <ref>Mishna Brurah (Intro to 308) </ref>
*rolls of silver foil or toilet paper <ref>Shalmei Yehuda pg 98, 171 writes that it’s [[Muktzeh]] because [[Muktzeh]] Machmat Issuro</ref>
*sticks <ref>Mishna Brurah (Intro to 308) </ref>
*sand <ref>Mishna Brurah (Intro to 308) </ref>
*shaanetz clothes <ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 308:47 </ref>
*spray paint <ref>Tiltulei [[Shabbat]] (pg 30) </ref>
*tin-foil roll <ref>Shalmei Yehuda (pg 98) rules that since a roll of tin-foil is unusable and it’s forbidden to rip it on [[Shabbat]] the roll is totally Muktzeh Machmat Gufo. </ref>
*used matches <ref>Yalkut Yosef (Kitzur Shulchan Aruch O.C. 308:100) </ref>
*Vaseline <ref>The Weekly Halacha Discussion (vol 2 pg 337) </ref>
*toothpaste <ref>The Weekly Halacha Discussion (vol 2 pg 337) </ref>

==Plants==

#Plants attached to the ground are muktzeh.<ref>Magen Avraham 308:39 writes that plants attached to the ground are muktzeh. The same is found in Magen Avraham 312:6 and Taz 336:1. However, Eliyah Rabba and Tosefet Shabbat (cited by Machasit Hashekel 312:6). Mishna Brurah 312 agrees with the Eliyah Rabba and Tosefet Shabbat. Minchat Shlomo 1:10 in fnt. 2 explains that the Eliya Rabba and others are lenient because they assume that grass is normally used to clean one's hands upon. Therefore, Orchot Shabbat 19:138 v. 2 p. 64 writes that nowadays since we don't use grass to clean oneself it is muktzeh. He quotes this from Rav Shlomo Zalman, Rav Elyashiv, and Minchat Yitzchak 2:138.

*The Gemara Shabbat 125b which implies that the attached vine is muktzeh even though it is attached to the ground. However, the Shitah Lran s.v. mechuberet baviya and Ritva in his first explanation answer that the vine is only mutkzeh since you have intention not to use it because doing so would kill the vine and prevent it from producing fruit. See Ritva's second answer.</ref> This is only relevant to plants that aren't included in the prohibition of benefiting from trees, see [[Plants on Shabbat]].
#A [[hadas]] or plant that is designated to be smelled on Shabbat is permitted to move.<ref>Mishna Brurah 312:19, (see Mishna Brurah 336:48 and 336:15 as well), Orchot Shabbat 19:139 v. 2 p. 64</ref>

==Foods==

#Any food that’s edible for animals isn’t [[Muktzeh]] as long as there are such animals around, however, if it’s only eaten by a specific animal which isn't common, the food is [[Muktzeh]] unless one owns such an animal. <ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 308:29 </ref>
#Soft bones, peels, or crumbs are not [[Muktzeh]] because they are edible for animals. <ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 308:27 </ref>
#However, egg shells, nut shells, or hard bones (from which all the meat was removed) which aren’t edible for animals may not be moved directly. If there’s a permissible item also on the plate, one may move the entire plate (but not touch the actual shells). If there’s a need for the place of the plate one may move the entire plate <ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 308:27, Mishna Brurah 308:113, 114 </ref> If the above doesn’t apply then one should
##shake it off the plate
##use a utensil to knock it off
##or if the above options are difficult place a permissible item on the plate and then move the entire plate. <ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 308:27, Mishna Brurah 308:115, 116 </ref>
#Some say that raw meat is not [[Muktzeh]]<ref>Gemara Shabbat 128a establishes that raw meat isn't muktzeh. Why? Rashba 123a s.v. hachi garis, Rambam Shabbat 26:16, and Ran (on Rif 51a s.v. basar) explain that raw meat isn't muktzeh since it is edible for humans to chew and eat. This is also implied by Rashi 128a. However, Tosfot 128a s.v. dag explains that it isn't muktzeh according to Rabbi Shimon since you could give raw meat to dogs. Shulchan Aruch O.C. 308:30 accepts the opinion of the Rashba, Ran, and Rambam. Therefore, if it is edible to chew it isn't muktzeh. Magen Avraham 308:56 based on the Yereyim significantly limits this to poultry which is soft and can be chewed and swallowed. Furthermore, we don't accept the leniency of Tosfot. However, Taz disagrees and holds that we follow the leniency of Rashba and Tosfot and raw meat is edible. Gra also implies like Taz that raw meat is edible. Mishna Brurah 308:125 concludes that one should be strict except in an extenuating circumstance when you could rely on Shulchan Aruch, Taz, and Gra. Yalkut Yosef Shabbat 2:308:6:6 writes that raw meat isn't muktzeh even today since it is still edible and someone who doesn't have any food would eat it. Also we could add the possibility of feeding it to a dog according to Tosfot.</ref> while others food it is muktzeh.<ref>Aruch Hashulchan 308:58 holds that raw meat today is muktzeh since no one eats it today. Ben Ish Chai Shana Sheniya Pekudei 9, Rav Moshe Feinstein (Tiltulei Shabbat p. 5), and Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Shemirat Shabbat Kehilchata p. 103) agree.</ref>
#While salted or smoked fish that’s edible isn’t [[Muktzeh]], while raw fish is [[Muktzeh]]<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 308:32 writes that salted fish isn’t [[Muktzeh]] while raw fish is. Mishna Brurah 308:126 writes that herring or other fish could be eaten (with difficulty) if salted or smoked aren’t [[Muktzeh]]. </ref> even if it’s edible for animals.<ref>Mishna Brurah 308:126 explains that a food which is meant to be eaten by people but is inedible is [[Muktzeh]] even if it’s edible to animals. </ref>
#Raw eggs aren't muktzeh.<ref>Aruch Hashulchan 308:58</ref>

==Animals==
Regarding other laws of animals on Shabbat and pets see [[Animals on Shabbat]].

#Animals are [[Muktzeh]] and one shouldn’t grab them directly even if there’s a loss involved (such as if the animals are going to break something). <ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 308:39, Mishna Brurah 308:146 </ref>
#If the animal needs to be walked one may do so without grabbing the animal directly except for chickens which usually flap their wings when held. <ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 308:40, Mishna Brurah 308:151 explains that because of Tzaar Baalei Chaim (pain of a living creature) it’s permissible to move a [[Muktzeh]] item partially. </ref>
#If there’s a need one may push animal from behind. <ref>Mishna Brurah 308:152 </ref>
#Animals trapped on Shabbat by a non-Jew are muktzeh.<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 325:5 based on Beitzah 24a rules that animals that a non-Jew trapped for you on Shabbat are forbidden. Mishna Brurah 325:21 explains that it is because of muktzeh. Why are untrapped animals muktzeh on Shabbat?

#Bet Yosef 310:2 explains based on the Baal Hameor that you didn’t expect to trap the animal so it is muktzeh.
#Taz 325:4 in fact says that the reason that trapped animals are forbidden are because we’re afraid you’ll trap yourself. This is similar to Bet Yosef 318:2.
#Shulchan Aruch Harav 310:3 explains that the trapped animals at the beginning of Shabbat we’re not in any person’s property at the beginning of Shabbat.
#Pri Megadim M”Z 325:4 implies that it is a case where you didn’t expect to trap the animal and you did something to reject its use on Shabbat.</ref>

==Forbidden objects==

#Shatnez clothing are [[Muktzah]] Machmat Gufo. <ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 307:47 quotes two opinions and sides with those who are lenient, however, Mishna Brurah 308:161 holds like the strict opinion. </ref> However Shatnez clothes of a non-Jew aren’t [[Muktzeh]] unless the non-Jew gives a Jew a collateral of Shatnez clothes. <ref>Shemirat Shabbat KeHilchata 20:37 based on Shulchan Aruch O.C. HaRav writes that Shatnez of a non-Jew isn’t [[muktzah]]. However, Mishna Brurah 308:161 (quoted in Shemirat Shabbat KeHilchata’s footnote there) writes that a non-Jew who gives a Jew a collateral of Shatnez clothes is [[Muktzeh]]. [[Muktzah]]: A Practial Guide (by Rabbi Simcha Bunim Cohen; pg 107) rules that Shaatnez clothes are [[Muktzah]] Machmat Gufo. </ref>
#A door that became detached from a house, building, etc. is Muktzeh Machmat Gufo. <ref>Mishna Brurah 308:35. </ref> However, if it became detached prior to the onset of [[Shabbat]] and was designated for permissible use, then it is not [[Muktzeh]].

==Designation of an Object for a Purpose==

#Items which are not normally used for a permissible purpose such as a rock<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 308:22 writes that there’s a distinction whether the object is normally used for a permissible purpose or not. This is also evident in Mishna Brurah 308:87 and 92. </ref> one needs to make a permanent designation or a physical action to fix it for that permissible use (like organizing rocks in order to sit on). <ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 308:21 writes that rocks which are Muktzeh Machmat Gufo a designation doesn’t work to make it non-[[Muktzeh]] rather an action is needed such as organizing the rocks. Rama 308:21 writes that rocks only need a designation. Mishna Brurah 308:90 writes the consensus of the achronim is to hold like Shulchan Aruch. Shulchan Aruch O.C. 308:22 adds that it is possible to designate something for an abnormal use with permanent designation.</ref>
#However, something which sometimes is used for a permissible purpose only needs a mental designation <ref>Mishna Brurah 308:85 and 93 write that a mental designation is sufficient and verbal one isn’t necessary </ref>, which should be a permanent designation, but in cases of need it’s sufficient to have a designation for that [[Shabbat]] alone.<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 308:22 quotes three opinions regarding an object that’s normally used for permissible purposes; some say a designation for that [[Shabbat]] alone is a designation, some say a permanent designation, and some say an action is necessary. Shulchan Aruch quotes the first opinion as the main (anonymous) opinion. Mishna Brurah 307:97 writes that in conclusion if there’s a need a designation for one [[Shabbat]] is sufficient. See Mishna Brurha (Shaar Hatziyun 312:7) and Mishna Brurah 303:73 is lenient and doesn't mention the qualification of a case of need. Mishna Brurah 308:86 writes that unlike Shulchan Aruch the Eliyah Rabba holds that a designation just for the weekday isn’t a designation rather a designation for that [[Shabbat]] is needed.</ref> Using that object for a permissible purpose before [[Shabbat]] is the equivalent of a designation and it wouldn’t be [[Muktzeh]]. <ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 308:22 writes that sitting on the sticks on wood or [[tying]] them together is a sufficient designation. Mishna Brurah 308:83 and 85 explain that an action expresses one’s intent to use it for a permissible purpose. </ref>
#A rock that is designated to be sat upon (with an action of being arranged) can be sat upon and moved for that purpose but not another purpose.<ref>Tehilah LDovid 308:29 discusses whether a yichud to matir muktzeh like a rock to sit upon does that turn it into a kli to move it for its own protection. Shulchan Aruch Harav 308:52 writes that a maaseh to organize pieces of wood gives it a torat kli but still you can only use it to sit on but not for another use. This is explicit in Ramban in Milchamot Shabbat 48b s.v. tenan and Ritva Shabbat 126b s.v. vakati. This also seems to be the Rambam Shabbat 25:21's opinion. Megilat Sefer Shabbat p. 366 discusses this topic. Proofs for this partial muktzeh is Rava in Beitzah 8b that designated dirt can only be used for certain purposes. Magen Avraham 498:33 quotes this. See also Beitzah 33a with Rashba and Ramban in Milchamot that pieces of wood on Yom Tov aren’t fully a kli and as such can be used only for certain purposes and not others. See Rabbi Akiva Eiger 498:6’s question and Rashba’s answer. Mishna Brurah 502:21 cites a dispute about this point.</ref> Some allow moving it completely.<ref>Mishna Brurah 308:73 writes that anything with a purpose is considered a kli and can be moved even for its protection. Also, Mishna Brurah 308:91 writes that if one designates a piece of wood to be used to sit on it would have a torat kli. Again in Mishna Brurah 308:89 writes that a rock that is designated properly can be moved around and not just moved for sitting.</ref>
#Designating a coin to be used on Shabbat for one Shabbat isn't sufficient. Designating it forever according to some poskim is sufficient.<ref>Orchot Shabbat v. 2 p. 114. Shulchan Aruch 303:22 writes that a coin needs designation forever. Mishna Brurah 308:93 writes that if you use it regularly use it for that use it is sufficient. Chazon Ish 42:13 cites by Orchot Shabbat argues that coins can't be designated forever since it isn't realistic for coins since you'll put it back with your other coins after you use it.</ref>

==Covers==

#A cover of a utensil aren't muktzeh as long as an action was done to form the cover.<ref>Gemara Shabbat 126b, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 308:10</ref>
#A cover of a barrel that is buried in the ground is only permitted to use if it has a handle.<ref>Gemara Shabbat 126b, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 308:10</ref>
#A pit that is partially above the ground which has a cover is permitted if it has a handle. If it doesn’t have a handle it is muktzeh.<ref>Gemara Shabbat 126b, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 308:10. Biur Halacha 308:10 s.v. ein writes that the covers of a pit that is visible partially above ground are muktzeh unless they have a handle. The reason is that since they are meant to function something that is attached to the ground they aren’t considered a kli that is meant to move. It is similar to doors according to Rambam Shabbat 25:6.</ref>

==Electric Appliances==

#Florescent and incandescent bulbs or flashlights are muktzeh.<ref>Shvut Yitzchak 14:4 p. 174 quotes Rav ELyashiv as holding that an incandescent bulb is muktzeh since it might be similar to the reason that a candle is muktzeh. Rav Moshe Feinstein (Tiltulei Shabbat Teshuvot n. 11) held that it is muktzeh because it could be confused with a candle. Orchot Shabbat v. 2 p. 88 follows Rav Elyashiv. Rav Moshe Feinstein in Igrot Moshe 4:91 seems to hold that a flashlight is only a kli shemelachto l'isur.</ref>

==Child Holding Muktzeh==

#It is forbidden to hold a child holding muktzeh unless the child is crying to the point that he can't be comforted by either putting him down or having him drop the muktzeh.<ref>Mishna Shabbat 141b, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 309:1. Why isn’t it tiltul min hasad tzorech dvar muter since you want the child?

#Tosfot 142a s.v. vnishdinhu answers it is muter if there’s a real need but not if there’s not a real need.
#Pri Megadim E”A 309:1 says that picking up the kid with a muktzeh item is like holding the muktzeh itself and not tiltul min hasad.
Why isn’t this tiltul min hasad at all? Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Shulchan Shlomo 308:1 and Shemirat Shabbat Kehilchata ch. 22 fnt. 99) Dirshu 309:3 explains it is normal way to hold something and doesn’t qualify as tiltul min hasad.

#Chazon Ish 47:2 explains that it is a tzorech dvar asur, since the kid wants it and I want him to have it so I want the muktzeh. Piskei Rid 141b is a support for this approach.</ref>
#It is forbidden to hold a child or even hold the hand of a child holding a coin since you might come to pick it up.<ref>Gemara Shabbat 142a, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 309:1</ref>

==Sources==
<references responsive="0" />
[[Category:Shabbat]]
[[Category:Muktzeh]]
{{Shabbat Table}}

Muktzeh Machmat Chisaron Kis

2023-10-17T19:07:24Z

Checht05: /* Sources */

{{Okay}}
An object that one may not use on [[Shabbat]], such as if its primary use is forbidden on [[Shabbat]], and the owner is careful about not using it for anything other than its intended use for fear that it may get ruined, is considered Muktzeh Machmat Chisaron Kis. Any object in this category may not be moved on [[Shabbat]] even for a permitted use or for the use of its place. <ref>The Gemara ([[Shabbat]] 157a) writes that even Rabbi Shimon, who usually is lenient in the laws of [[Muktzeh]], would agree to the concept of Muktzeh Machmat Chisaron Kis. Based on Tosfot ([[Shabbat]] 123b s.v. VeSakina), S”A 308:1 rules that Muktzeh Machmat Chisaron Kis may not be moved even for a permitted use or for the use of its place.
* The Rosh ([[Shabbat]] 17:4) understands Muktzeh Machmat Chisaron Kis to apply to objects that a person is concerned about using for any purpose other than its primary one. This language is quoted in S”A 308:1. Mishna Brurah 308:2 explains that one wouldn’t use these objects for any other purpose because of a fear of devaluing it.
* To clarify, the [[Tosefet Shabbat]] 310:13 writes that Muktzeh Machmat Chisaron Kis only applies to a Kli SheMelachto LeIssur, a utensil whose primary purpose is prohibited on [[Shabbat]]. He explains that the owner of a Kli SheMelachto LeIssur that is also something that one is concerned about using for anything else, sets it aside completely not to be used on [[Shabbat]]. However, a person doesn’t set aside a utensil whose primary purpose is permitted on [[Shabbat]] even if he wouldn’t use it for other uses and so it isn’t [[Muktzeh]]. S”A HaRav 308:4, Rabbi Mordechai Willig (“Hilchos [[Muktzeh]],” min 8-9) and Rav Hershel Schachter (“Insights into the Laws of [[Muktzeh]],” min 12-14) agree. Orchot [[Shabbat]] (vol 2, p. 42) argues that the [[Tosefet Shabbat]]’s rule is imprecise based the cases of merchandise (S”A 308:1) and a heavy cabinet (Mishna Brurah 308:8). Therefore, he concludes that the category includes anything that isn’t meant to be used on [[Shabbat]] and its owner is careful about not using it for other uses.
* In regards to other definitions of this category, the Magen Avraham 308:3 writes that anything expensive is considered Muktzeh Machmat Chisaron Kis. The Torat [[Shabbat]] 302:2 argues that it is not dependant on the price of the object but rather whether the owner considers it important and is concerned about it. See Binyan Shalom 308:1 who explains that the Magen Avraham agrees to the Torat [[Shabbat]] but just borrows the language of the Rishonim.
* Additionally, Rashi (123b s.v. veyeted) explains that Muktzeh Machmat Chisaron Kis applies to objects that a person is concerned about and designates for them a place because it doesn’t have another purpose. Igrot Moshe 5:22:12, however, notes that designation of a place isn’t crucial in the determination of Muktzeh Machmat Chisaron Kis but rather it is simply an indication that the owner is concerned about the object. Similarly, Mishna Brurah 308:3 writes that any object that a person is careful with and because of it’s value one wouldn’t use for anything other than it’s designated purpose, is considered Muktzeh Machmat Chisaron Kis. </ref>
==Muktzeh Machmat Chisaron Kis==
===Definition===
# Merchandise which the owner is particular not to use in anticipation of its sale<ref>Machasit Hashekel 308:2, Pri Megdim E”A 308:2, Levushei Sarad 308:2 all understand that it depends on the individual and not the place. Mishna Brurah 308:6 codifies these opinions that it depends on the owner exclusively. However, Shulchan Aruch Harav 308:6 implies that it depends on the place and if in that place they are makpid it is mutzeh machmat chisaron kis and if not not. It depends on the place. Harchev Daat Muktzeh 1 p. 401 points out this dispute.</ref> is Muktzeh Machmat Chisaron Kis. However, if the owner is not concerned that the merchandise will get ruined, it is not [[Muktzeh]]. <Ref>The Bet Yosef 308:1 asks how the Rambam could write that merchandise is Muktzeh Machmat Chisaron Kis if the Gemara [[Shabbat]] 19b implies that it is not [[Muktzeh]] according to Rabbi Shimon and he concludes that if the owner is concerned about using it then it is Muktzeh Machmat Chisaron Kis, but if he is not concerned it is not [[Muktzeh]]. Rama 308:1 and Mishna Brurah 308:7 codify this as halacha. Chazon Ish 42:16 clarifies that merchandise can be Muktzeh Machmat Chisaron Kis even if the item is otherwise a [[Kli SheMelachto LeHeter]]. Shulchan Aruch HaRav 308:4 and Shemirat Shabbat KeHilchata 20:21 agree.</ref>
# Food which one plans to sell is not considered muktzeh machmat chisaron kis according to some poskim.<ref>Rav Nevinsal in Byitzchak Yikreh 308:1</ref>
# Some say that Muktza Machmat Chisaron Kis only applies to vessels that are already Kli SheMelachto LeIssur but not to vessels that are [[Kli SheMelachto LeHeter]].<ref>Shulchan Aruch HaRav 308:4, Yalkut Yosef (vol 2, pp. 328-332)
Can you have muktzeh machmat chisaron kis for a kli shemelachto lheter?
*The Gemara 45b initially assumes that a canopy is muktzeh machmat chisaron kis (see Tosfot 46a) even though it is kli shemelachto lheter. Pnei Yehoshua in fact is bothered why the gemara makes this assumption if it is impossible to have muktzeh machmat chisaron kis for a kli shemelachto lheter. Tosefet Shabbat 310:13 answers that a canopy is melachto lisur binyan ohel. Also, Shulchan Aruch Harav 308:4 holds that it is impossible to have muktzeh machat chisaron kis for Kli SheMelachto LeHeter.
*Chazon Ish 41:17 and 43:17 argues that there’s muktzeh machmat chisaron kis for all kelim. Shaarei Muktzeh siman 15 p. 105 quotes Tosfot 46a, Rashba (Avodat Hakodesh Moed 5), Rosh Yosef 46a s.v. vda, Mahari Avuhav 308:1, and Mishna Brurah 308:8 that agree with the Chazon Ish that all utensils can be muktzeh machmat chisaron kis. However, Rosh (responsa 22), Tosefet Shabbat 310:13, Peni Yehoshua 46a, Shulchan Aruch Harav 308:4, and Yalkut Yosef (vol 2, pp. 328-332) hold that it only applies to kli shemelachto lisur. The reason for this approach is that a kli shemelachto lisur is partially designated not to be used and once they are also expensive and fragile then they are completely designated not to be used.
*Rambam Shabbat 25:9 writes that utensils that are designated to be sold are muktzeh machat chisaron kis. Why? Shulchan Aruch Harav 308:4 and Rav Pinchas Brandsfeman (Shiurim v. 6 p. 7) answer that utensils to be sold are all kli shemelachto lisur. However, Tehilah Ldovid 308:1 answers that even a kli shemelachto lheter are muktzeh machmat chisaron kis since you don’t want to move it since it is designated to be sold.</ref> The reason for this approach is that a kli shemelachto lisur is partially designated not to be used and once they are also expensive and fragile then they are completely designated to not be used.<ref>Tosefet Shabbat 310:13</ref> Others hold that muktzeh machmat chisaron kis is relevant to any utensil as long as a person wouldn't move it.<ref>Chazon Ish 43:17. See above for sources.</ref>

===Rules===
# A item that is Muktzeh Machmat Chisaron Kis cannot be moved for any need, for the need of its place or for the need of the object itself. <Ref>Tosfot 123b s.v. vsakina and Rosh responsa 22:8 clarify that it is forbidden to move something that is muktzeh machmat chisaron kis at all even if you need it itself. Bet Yosef 308:1 explains that the Rambam 25:9 agrees. Darkei Moshe 308:1 cites Rabbenu Yerucham 12:13 as agreeing. However, the Mordechai Shabbat 3:315 argues that muktzeh machmat chisaron kis is permitted to move for the need of the item or its place. Shulchan Aruch O.C. 308:1 rules like the majority of rishonim that muktzeh machmat chisaron kis is completely forbidden. Maamer Mordechai 308:1 agrees.</ref>
# Something that was muktzeh machmat chisaron kis during [[Bein HaShemashot]] and broke on Shabbat and is no longer muktzeh machmat chisaron kis it is still muktzeh.<ref>Magen Avraham 308:19, Mishna Brurah 308:35, Shulchan Aruch Harav 308:4, Chazon Ish 43:21. Rabbi Akiva Eiger Beitzah 2b s.v. btosfot argues that perhaps it is not muktzeh since once a person decides to use it for something else it is not muktzeh machmat chisaron kis. He echoes this position in Hagahot Rabbi Akiva Eiger on Magen Avraham 308:19.</ref>
# Merchandise which is meant to be sold, if the owner is particular not to use it, is Muktzeh Machmat Chisaron Kis. However, if the owner is not concerned that it will get ruined, it is not [[Muktzeh]]. <Ref>Rama 308:1, Mishna Brurah 308:7 </ref>
# A board of wood which is owned by a carpenter or a store owner who plans on selling is Muktzeh Machmat Chisaron Kis if most carpenters are concerned about using it for other purposes (such as sitting on it) so that it does not break. <Ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 308:26 </ref>
# Some say that it is permitted to move muktzeh machmat chisaron kis by placing something permitted on top of it, however, most hold that this is forbidden.<ref>Rosh 22:8:4 writes that it is permitted to move any kli shemelachto lisur if you place upon it something permitted such as a piece of bread. That solution does not work for real muktzeh but does work for any kli. Rabbi Akiva Eiger 305:7 suggests that the same should apply to muktzeh machmat chisaron kis. Chazon Ovadia v. 3 p. 57 cites the Chazon Ish 47:11 and Or Letzion 2:26:4 who imply this as well. However, the Taz 311:5 and Tosefet Shabbat 308:23 imply otherwise. Pri Megadim M”Z 4 has a doubt about this. Chazon Ovadia concludes that one should be strict.</ref>
# It is permitted to move muktzeh machmat chisaron kis with one's body like all muktzeh.<ref>Pri Megadim M"Z 308 introduction points out that the Bet Yosef in his introduction to 308 implies that the leniencies of all of muktzeh such as moving it with one's body or tiltul min hasad don't apply to muktzeh machmat chisaron kis. [http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=41315&st=&pgnum=119 Tehilah LDovid 308:2] disagrees with this understanding of the Bet Yosef and is lenient. Imrei Shem pp. 111-122 (R' Refaeli Mordechai Eliyahu) defends the Pri Megadim. Yalkut Yosef Shabbat v. 2 p. 317 fnt. 4 quotes Rav Ovadia as holding like the Tehillah Ldovid.</ref>
# Tiltul min hasad is permitted for muktzeh machmat chisaron kis like all other muktzeh.<ref> Pri Megadim M"Z 309:2 writes that according to the Bet Yosef there is no leniency of tiltul min hasad for muktzeh machmat chisaron kis. [http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=41315&st=&pgnum=119 Tehillah LDovid 308:2] and Tosefet Shabbat 308:3 disagree. Kaf Hachaim 308:10 is lenient. Imrei Shem pp. 111-122 (R' Refaeli Mordechai Eliyahu) defends the Pri Megadim. Yalkut Yosef Shabbat v. 2 p. 317 fnt. 4 quotes Rav Ovadia as holding like the Tehillah Ldovid.</ref>

===Examples===
# A golden cigarette case is considered Muktzeh Machmat Chisaron Kis. <ref> Tiltulei [[Shabbat]] (pg 45 in the note) quotes Rav Moshe Feinstein (based on Mishna Brurah 310:27) as ruling that any case designated to hold a [[Muktzeh]] item, the owner doesn’t want to use container for anything else, and the owner is careful that the case is not broken is considered Muktzeh Machmat Chisaron Kis. </ref>
# A [[shofar]] is considered Muktzeh Machmat Chisaron Kis unless one is not concerned about using it for other uses. <Ref>Rama 308:4, Mishna Brurah 308:25 write that a shofer is [[Kli Sh’Melachto LeIssur]] but Shalmei Yehuda (pg 32) quoting Rav Elyashiv and Shemirat Shabbat KeHilchata (pg 361) quoting Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach notes that for most people the [[shofar]] is expensive and would not be used for anything else and therefore it is Muktzeh Machmat Chisaron Kis. </ref>
# There is a dispute among the poskim whether to consider [[Pesach]] dishes that one would not use during the year as Muktzeh Machmat Chisaron Kis or not. <ref>Shemirat Shabbat Kehilchata 20:22 writes that [[Pesach]] dishes that a person is careful not to use during the year even if a need came up are considered Muktzeh Machmat Chisaron Kis. Rav Hershel Schachter (“Hilchos Muktze,” min 27-30) argues that they aren’t [[Muktzeh]] since they are perfectly useable utensils, whose primary purpose is permitted. He reasoned that even though the owner didn’t plan on using them on [[Shabbat]], according to Rabbi Shimon, they aren’t [[Muktzeh]]. Chut Shani (vol 3, p. 88) agrees. </ref>
# A credit card<ref>Shemirat Shabbat Khilchata 20:20 writes that credit cards are muktzeh machmat chisaron kis. Orchot Shabbat 19:95 and [https://ph.yhb.org.il/en/01-23-04/ Peninei Halacha Shabbat 23:4 (v. 2 p. 158)] agree. [https://torah.org/torah-portion/weekly-halacha-5771-behar/ Rabbi Neustadt] wrote that it is completely muktzeh machmat gufo like money since it has no use.[https://ohr.edu/ask_db/ask_main.php/190/Q6/ A rabbi from Ohr Same'ach] agreed.</ref>, business documents, checks, securities, tax exempt documents, bills of money, bus or subway cards are all Muktzeh Machmat Chison Kis.<ref>Shemirat Shabbat Kehilchata 20:20. Chut Shani v. 3 p. 111 writes that bus cards are completely muktzeh. He is not sure whether a magnetic identity card used in a hospital or the like is considered a kli shemelachto lisur or muktzeh machmat gufo. He discusses whether it is a kli since it has a use albeit forbidden or perhaps since it is not used in it of itself it is like money which is muktzeh machmat gufo. He concludes that one should be strict and treat it as muktzeh.</ref>
# Matzah Mitzvah on Erev Pesach when Pesach falls out on Shabbat is muktzeh machmat chisaron kis.<ref>Pri Megadim E"A 308:10, 444:1, Shemirat Shabbat Kehilchata 20:23, Yalkut Yosef (Erev Pesach Shechal Bshabbat n. 13). [https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/867644/rabbi-hershel-schachter/kollel-chaburah-on-beitzah-muktzeh-machmat-chisaron-kis-(11a)/ Rav Schachter (towards the end)] questioned this for the night of Shabbat since some permit eating it then.</ref>
# A shechita knife is muktzeh machmat chisaron kis.<ref>Gemara 123b establishes that a sakina deshkavta is muktzeh machmat chisaron kis. Tosfot, Rabbenu Chananel, Rashba, and Shulchan Aruch 308:1 understand it to be a shechita knife.
#Rashi 123b translates sakina deshkavta as a butcher’s knife to cut knife. Why is the sakina deshkavta considered a kli shemelachto lisur (if that is necessary for muktzeh machmat chisaron kis)?
##According to Tosfot Shabbat 123b s.v. vsakina and Rabbenu Chananel it is not a question since they translate it as a shechita knife and shechita is a melacha. Avodat Hakodesh Bet Moad 5:2:26 agrees.
##Chiko Mamtakim Yom Tov v. 3 p. 712 writes that the reason that a butcher knife is kli shemelachto lisur is because its use is uvda dchol.
##Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Shemirat Shabbat Kehilchata ch. 20 fnt. 52, Shvut Yitzchak p. 13) explained that since the knife prepares meat that is going to be sold it is a kli shemelachto lisur. </ref>

==Papers==
# Business letters, building plans, account documents, passports, and identification certificates are [[Muktzeh]]. <Ref>Shemirat Shabbat KeHilchata 28:6 </ref>
# A loose leaf binder that contains commercial documents, building plans, account documents, passports, or identity certificates is considered [[Muktzeh]] and shouldn’t be moved. <Ref>Shemirat Shabbat KeHilchata 28:9 </ref>
# Some poskim say that blank paper is considered Muktzeh Machmat Chisaron Kis, while others only consider it a Kli SheMelachto LeIssur. <ref>* Mishna Brurah 308:3 writes that blank paper is Muktzeh Machmat Chisaron Kis. Rav Moshe Feinstein in Igrot Moshe 4:72 writes that this still applies today since no sensible person would waste a blank piece of paper that’s useable for writing. See Halachos of [[Muktzeh]] (p. 84) who quotes Rav Moshe Feinstein as saying that even paper that one isn’t concerned about wasting is still [[Muktzeh Machmat Gufo]] since it has no purpose.
* Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Meor HaShabbat v. 1 letter 10:3), however, says that a single piece of paper isn’t [[Muktzeh]] because people aren’t concerned about using it to clean something. Thus, Shemirat Shabbat Kehilchata 20:19 writes that only expensive stationary is Muktzeh Machmat Chisaron Kis, but regular paper is considered Kli SheMelachto LeIssur since it is designated for writing. Shevet Halevi 9:78 and Chazon Ovadia v. 3 agree.</ref> The lenient opinion rules that nowadays paper is so commonplace that it is permissible to handle a blank notebook because it can also be used as a bookmark. <ref> Hazon Ovadia, Volume 3, Page 97; Ach Tov VaHessed, Year 5783, Page 120 </ref>
# Blank pieces of paper are [[Muktzeh]]. Therefore, if a loose-leaf binder has pages with content together with blank pages, and the pages of content have some importance and one sometimes reads them, then, the binder is not [[Muktzeh]] and one may turn the blank pages in order to reach the pages of content. However, if the pages of content aren’t of importance and one doesn’t read them, then the binder as a whole is [[Muktzeh]] and should be moved. <Ref>Shemirat Shabbat KeHilchata 28:9. Chut Shani v. 3 p. 59 is lenient. </ref>
# A stamped envelope is muktzeh machmat chisaron kis.<Ref>Tiferet 308:8 quoting Yalkut Yosef p. 346</ref>

==Disputed Items==
# The following items are considered by some to be Kli Sh’Melachto LeHeter while others consider by others to be [[Kli Sh’Melachto LeIssur]].
## pictures on the wall <ref> Chazon Ish 43:17 considers it severe [[Muktzeh]], while Sh”t Igrot Moshe 5:21(13), 22(12) considers it non-[[Muktzeh]]). If it is expensive, Shemirat Shabbat Kehilchata 20:22 writes that it is muktzeh machmat chisaron kis. A Guide to Practical Halacha (Shabbat v. 3 p. 158 n. 75) records Rav Moshe Feinstein's lenient opinion.
* Is a picture muktzeh machmat chisaron kis? Chazon Ish 43:16 holds that it is. He seems to apply this to all clocks and pictures even if they aren’t expensive since they have a designated place. Chut Shani v. 3 p. 59 explains that according to the chazon ish designating a place makes something muktzeh even if it isn't expensive or fragile.
* Rav Moshe (Halachos of Muktzeh p. 73) holds that it isn’t unless a person is cautious not to move it because it is fragile. However, if you only don’t move it because it is on the wall and it looks nice there that isn’t muktzeh machmat chisaron kis. Rav Elyashiv (Shalmei Yehuda 3:9) and Brit Olam (Muktzeh Machmat Chisaron Kis n. 7) agrees that they aren’t muktzeh machmat chisaron kis unless they are expensive.</ref>
## clocks on the wall <ref> Chazon Ish 43:17 considers it severe [[Muktzeh]], while Sh”t Igrot Moshe 5:21(13), 22(12) considers it non-[[Muktzeh]]) </ref>
# Some poskim write that a wallet is muktzeh machmat chisaron kis, while most poskim only consider it a kli shemelachto lisur.<ref>
* The Raavan 378 writes that a wallet designated for money is muktzeh like grogrot and compares it to a bed designated for money. The Hagahot Maimoniyot 25 cites this. Rama 310:7 does as well. Rama 310:7 explains that it isn’t completely muktzeh but rather only considered like a kli shemelachto lisur, while the Magen Avraham 310:5 holds it is completely muktzeh. Bet Meir 310:7 and Mishna Brurah 310:27 agree with the Rama. Why would the Magen Avraham say that the wallet is completely muktzeh?
* Rav Soloveitchik (Shiurei Rav Soloveitchik on Shabbat by Rav Schachter pp. 115-7) explained that the main idea of Rabbenu Tam is that anything which has no use on Shabbat is forbidden as complete muktzeh. That can take the form of muktzeh machmat chisaron kis or kli she’kol melachto l’isur. According to Rav Moshe (igrot Moshe 5:22:12), we can explain that yichud makom isn’t critical at all. The main idea of muktzeh machat chisaron kis isn’t designation of place but that you wouldn’t use it for another use.</ref>

==Sources==
<references responsive="0" />
[[Category:Shabbat]]
[[Category:Muktzeh]]
{{Shabbat Table}}