Welcome back to the world of muktzeh and hotza-ah TB Shabbat 142

We actually began chapter 21 of massechet Shabbat yesterday with this Mishnah. “A person may take his son in his hands on Shabbat, and even though there is a stone, which is a set-aside item, in the child’s hand, it is not prohibited to pick up the child” (Sefaria.org translation) At first glance one might assume that the Mishnah is only dealing with the subject of muktzeh. Even though the stone wasn’t designated for the Shabbat, the Mishnah doesn’t consider it muktzeh because the father can pick up the child with the stone in his hand.

Of course, that’s not how the Gemara understands the case. Rava adds the dimension of carrying the child with the stone from one domain to another. Rava makes the case that the stone in the child’s hand is muktzeh no less than a purse hanging around child’s neck.  Since a parent is not allowed to pick up and carry a child with a purse hanging around his neck, the same should apply to a child holding a stone. “GEMARA: Rava said: If one carried out a living baby to the public domain on Shabbat, and the baby had a purse that was hanging around his neck, he is liable for carrying out the purse. However, one who carried out a dead baby, with a purse hanging around his neck, is exempt. The Gemara responds: Rava holds in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Natan, who said: A living being carries itself. Therefore, one who carries a living being from one domain to another is not liable.

“The Gemara asks: And let the purse be negated relative to the baby; and he should be exempt for carrying out the purse as well. Didn’t we learn in a mishna: One who carries out a living person on a bed is exempt even for carrying out the bed, because the bed is secondary to the person? The same should be said with regard to the purse, relative to the baby. The Gemara answers: In a case where a bed is relative to a living being, the living being negates it, as the bed is needed to carry the person and is secondary to him. However, in a case where a purse is relative to a baby, the baby does not negate it, since it is independently significant…” (Sefaria.org translation) (If you want to learn why a dead baby is different than a live baby, continue studying this daf. gg)

So if the stone in the child’s hand is always considered muktzeh like the purse, why does the Mishnah allow the father to pick him up and carry him? “We learned in the mishna: A person may take his son in his hands on Shabbat; and this is permitted even though there is a stone in the child’s hand. As it can be inferred from this mishna that the stone is negated relative to the child, why, then, is he liable in the case of a purse hanging around a live baby’s neck? Let the purse be negated relative to the baby. The Sages of the school of Rabbi Yannai say: You cannot infer from this mishna that the stone is negated and therefore it is permitted to move it. Rather, the mishna is referring to a baby who has longings for his father. It is permitted for the father to move the stone because if the father does not lift him, the baby might take ill.” (Sefaria.org translation)

The answer is obvious for any parent who has or is raising young children. I think that the child with the stone in his hand is throwing a wicket temper tantrum and wants to be picked up. Even though no child will die throwing a temper tantrum, the ultimate well-being of the boy or girl is more important than the stone being muktzeh. If picking him or her up will calm the child down, for God’s sake pick up the child.