MISC section - contents: Rocks are, in general, one of the classic examples of muktzeh (Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 308:21) because, in their simple form, they do not have a defined use that would make them considered a kli (utensil). However, if one does something to prepare them to be used for a given purpose or if their owner decides, even without an act of preparation, to use them permanently for a purpose, then they are not muktzeh (ibid.:21-22). Thus, rocks that were collected for and, even more so, incorporated in a rock collection need not be muktzeh. The only question is if one's high regard for the collection causes him problems, as we will explain. Things that are purposeless are muktzeh, as there is not expected, when Shabbat begins, to be a good reason to move them. The fact that later on a use arises does not change their status. But there is a factor that makes something more muktzeh specifically because of its value. This category is called muktzeh machmat chisaron kis (=MMCK). The classical cases of MMCK that are discussed in the gemara and early poskim deal with utensils that are designed to perform functions that are forbidden on Shabbat (keilim she'me- lachtam l'issur). Such utensils can be moved only in limited circumstances (details of which are beyond our present scope). However, if these utensils are additionally the type that are important enough to their owners that they are careful not to use the utensils for anything other than their main purpose, then they are MMCK. As such, they are further off limits and cannot be moved at all (ibid.:1). What happens if you have the second level of "muktzeh factor" without the first? In other words, what happens if you have a utensil that is made for permitted use (kli shemelachto l'heter) but because of different reasons, including its value, its owner is careful that it is not moved around? Two things are quite clear. Firstly, the Rambam (Shabbat 25:9) says that an object that was totally set aside not to be used on Shabbat, because, for example, it was put away to be sold, is MMCK even if its ultimate use is for permitted activities (see Aruch Hashulchan 308:11). [Ed. addition. As an example, neckties are not muktzeh on Shabbat. But let's say that you sell ties and as a general rule, you do not "borrow" from your stock in order to wear a tie because you do want the ties you sell to be in perfect, new condition. One Shabbat morning, you decided you'd like to wear one of your tiesset aside for sale. You may not do so, because your stock of ties are merchandise and are MMCK. You want to change your policy - it must be done during the week. This example is the responsibility of TT, not VR.] It is also clear that a kli shemelachto l'issur is more easily assumed to be MMCK, because its range of possible uses starts off limited before the issue of its value (see Mishna Berura 308:8 & Shulchan Aruch Harav 308:4).A kli shemelachto l'heter needs a higher level of concern about its damage to be MMCK. The question is where to draw the line. Cases which are disputed by recent poskim include pictures and clocks that are hung on a wall. Rav Moshe Feinstein z.t.l. (responsum #13 in "Tiltulei Shabbat") says that these are not muktzeh. His implied rationale seems to be that hanging them up on the wall is the way to use them, not the way to remove them from use. But Shemirat Shabbat K'hilchata (20:22) says that since one is careful not to move them from their places for fear they may get damaged, they are set aside as immovable objects, along the lines of the Mishna Berura (ibid.). (The Chazon Ish (OC 43:17) implies that even if something is not moved because there is no reason to move it, it is muktzeh). Presumably, if one often removes or rearranges the clock or picture, then it would not be muktzeh, but most people do not do so. Your case depends on you. If you move around rocks in the
collection or take out individual rocks on a semi-regular basis, then they are
not muktzeh. If you are consciously careful to keep them untouched for extended
periods then the matter depends on the opinions of the poskim mentioned. "Rebbe, our Sages tell us that one who runs away from honor, honor pursues him. All my life I have been running away from honor, yet honor has never pursued me." "Your trouble," said the sage, "is that you constantly looked
behind you to see if honor was indeed pursuing you." It appears that the first to opt for this choice was Yitro. In his "Studies in the Weekly Parsha", Rav Yehuda Nachshoni argues that Chazal doubted Yitro's sincerity when he rejoiced over Bnei Yisrael's miraculous rescue. He cites Rashi, based on Sanhedrin 94a, who says that when Yitro heard of the destruction of Egypt, "his flesh was filled with goose pimples", which sug- gests that Yitro sympathized with the Egyptians. Rav Nachshoni suggests that Chazal's position is based on Yitro's subsequent behavior. When Moshe invited Yitro to join Bnei Yisrael in entering the Promised Land, Yitro declined the offer. While Ramban says that Yitro did, indeed, go to Israel, all other commentators understand that he chose not to go to Israel and they offer a variety of reasons for his decision. Sforno suggest that Yitro claimed that "my old age cannot bear the climate or the food of a new country". According to the Sifrei, Yitro posed other, well- known, arguments as well: "I have a family. I have a country. I have property." Rabbi Eliezer HaModai says that Yitro argued that he would be able to do more good in the diaspora converting the gentiles. Rivash maintains that Yitro feared the dangers involved in the conquest of the land, despite Moshe's assurance that were Yitro to put his trust in God, he would have no reason fear. The Klausenberg Rav contrasts Yitro unfavorably with another famous convert, Ruth. He points out that the Midrash says that Ruth merited to have the kingdom of David established through her because she recognized that being a Jew requires one to live in Israel, and she fulfilled this duty at great sacrifice. Thus, Ruth was greater than Yitro. We can emulate Ruth by recognizing the inseparable connection
between each and every Jew and Eretz Yisrael. Or we can make Yitro-like excuses.
It is in our hands. TORAH THOUGHTS as contributed by Aloh Naaleh members for
publication in the Orthodox Union's 'Torah Insights', a weekly Torah publication
on Parshat Ha'Shavuah Bar / Bat Mitzvah Internet Resource Center Free Internet resource center including Torah maftirs and haftorahs, invitation ideas, speeches, stories and more - www.my-bar-mitzvah.com Ed. note: While you're at it, you should check out Jacob's many
other sites. His main homepage is
www.jr.co.il - from there you can get into many other sites and webpages,
including the J site, which you can also access directly at www.j.co.il • Leave
yourself a nice chunk of time to go through all of Jacob's webpages. You'll find
yourself bookmarking it (or adding it to your favorites) and returning often. •
Putting yourself on the JR email list will get you frequent updates on hot
sites, articles and pictures of interest, & other juicy web-tidbits. The Aseret Hadibrot begin boldly with a statement that, "I am the Lord your G-d who delivered you from the Land of Egypt". The rabbis, however, question why G-d bases His authority on the Exodus rather than on the Creation, which would appear to have a much wider and more universal appeal. Ibn Ezra argues that G-d wished for Bnei Yisrael to express their gratitude for the great miracles bestowed upon them. Moreover, adds Rabeinu Bachya, since the Jews had not witnessed Creation, it could not have the same power as the testimony of the wondrous deeds of the Exodus that they had all seen only several weeks earlier. Rabeinu Yonah submits that if we recall that the miracles of the
Exodus were performed for our benefit, we would easily understand that the
demands of the Aseret Hadibrot are also in our best interest. Nowadays, however,
to make the ascent from Mizrayim to Sinai we appear to need every one of the 49
days between Pesach(Exodus) and Shavu'ot (Revelation) in order to climb the
spiritual ladder. Finally, then, we might also acclaim, "We shall do, and we
shall listen!" [The Parshat Yitro Homepage]
|
