The history of muktzeh TB Shabbat 123

Yesterday we began the 17^th chapter of massechet Shabbat. This chapter delves deeply into the laws of muktzeh, (מוקצה). Muktzeh is essentially a restriction on objects that were not 'prepared' before the Sabbath. The absence of preparedness in this sense means that when Shabbat began, the vast majority of people would not have expected to use this particular item or substance on Shabbat. We are forbidden to move muktzeh items on Shabbat.

Today’s daf TB Shabbat 123 begins to define the different categories of muktzeh. The first is muktzeh makhmat issur (מוקצה מחמת איסור), objects that are totally prohibited because of Shabbat violations. An example would be a plow. Once Shabbat has begun we are prohibited to work the land; consequently, we are forbidden to move the plow from its place. If the object can be repurposed for a permitted Shabbat activity (דבר שמלאכתו לאיסור לצורך גופו), one may use that object. A hammer or mallet is an example. Ordinarily one is forbidden to move the mallet on Shabbat because of the prohibited labor of building, but “a person may move a mallet, which is generally used for labor prohibited on Shabbat, to crack nuts with it is permitted to crack that shell’s.” (Sefaria.com translation) The second is muktzeh makhmat khsaron kis (מוקצה מחמת חסרון כיס), objects that are so valuable that the owner puts them away so that they won’t be damaged or ruined. The following objects are examples of muktzeh makhmat khsaron kis from today’s daf.  “Rav Ḥinana bar Shelemya said in the name of Rav: Everyone agrees in the case of launderers’ pins, presses, and clothing rods (Arukh), that since one is particular about them to ensure that they remain intact, he designates a place for them and does not move them for other purposes. Therefore, everyone agrees that it is prohibited to move them.” (Sefaria.com translation)

Today’s daf gives a little history of muktzeh. We see the evolution of this law when in the very beginning the sages were very strict in the definition of muktzeh, but over time became more lenient. “The Sages taught in the Tosefta: Initially, they would say that only three utensils may be moved on Shabbat: A knife for cutting a cake of dried figs, and a combined spoon and fork (ge’onim) to clean the filth [zuhama listeran] of a pot, and a small knife that is on the table. Each of these items is required for eating and may be used, and it had been prohibited to move any other utensil. However, over the generations, when the Rabbis saw that Jewish people were vigilant in observing the prohibitions of Shabbat, they permitted, and then they permitted again, and then they permitted again, until they said in the last mishna: All utensils may be moved on Shabbat except for a large saw and the blade of a plow.” (Sefaria.com translation)

Abaye and Rava disagree with the evolutionary stages of muktzeh with Rava being the more lenient of the two. As a side note, Gemara teaches that the prophet Nechmiah introduced the strictest definition of muktzeh.

“Abaye says: Initially, they permitted moving an object whose primary function is for a permitted use, for the purpose of utilizing the object itself to perform a permitted action. And then they permitted moving an object whose primary function is for a permitted use, for the purpose of sitting in or utilizing its place. And then they permitted moving an object whose primary function is for a prohibited use, for the purpose of utilizing the object itself to perform a permitted action, yes; however, for the purpose of utilizing its place, no. And still, utensils that can be held in one of his hands, yes, they may be moved; however, utensils that can only be held in his two hands, no, they may not be moved, in order to signify that there is a prohibition to move certain items. This prohibition remained intact until they said: All utensils may be moved on Shabbat, and even those that can only be held in both hands.

“Rava said to him: After all, it was taught in the Tosefta: They permitted, what difference is there to me if it is for the purpose of utilizing the object itself, and what difference is there to me if it is for the purpose of utilizing its place; why introduce distinctions that are not explicitly stated in the Tosefta? Rather, Rava said that it should be explained as follows: Initially, they permitted moving an object whose primary function is for a permitted use, both for the purpose of utilizing the object itself and for the purpose of sitting in or utilizing its place. And then they permitted moving that object from the sun into the shade. And then they permitted moving an object whose primary function is for a prohibited use, both for the purpose of utilizing the object itself and for the purpose of sitting in or utilizing its place, yes; however, moving that object from the sun into the shade, no, they did not permit it. And still, utensils that can be carried by one person, yes, they may be moved; however, utensils that can only be carried by two people, no, they may not be moved. This prohibition remained intact until they said: All utensils may be moved on Shabbat, and even those that can only be carried by two people.” (Sefaria.com translation)