SEIF 1

WOOD THAT YOU HANG MEAT AND FISH ON

Rav said that wood that you hang meat on is not Muktza, but those you hang fish on are Muktza. The Rif and Rosh explain the reason because it's Muktza Machmas Mius (because they're disgusting.) Therefore we, that Paskin like R' Shimon that doesn't hold that utensils are just because they're disgusting, would hold even those that hang fish are not Muktza.

The Rambam Paskins that the fish ones are Muktza. The Magid Mishna explains his Shita that the reason that it's Muktza is that since people don't set it aside between jobs like they do for meat, but rather throw the board between the other scrap wood and then take any wood when you need it again, so it doesn't receive the status of being a utensil and is like any other piece of wood, which are Muktza.

MUKTZA BECAUSE IT'S PROHIBITED

The Bais Yosef say that even R' Shimon prohibits moving things that are forbidden to partake on Shabbos (Muktza Machmas Issur) if you don't think that it might become permitted on Shabbos.

The Taz asks from the case in Simon 318 that we allow people to partake in a cow that was Shechted on Shabbos for a sick person even if he was well before Shabbos. We see, even though the cow was prohibited from partaking on Shabbos while it was alive, and from the start of Shabbos nobody could have predicted that the need arise to Shect it, and still R' Shimon permits eating it on Shabbos. The Chasam Sofar brings the Magen Avraham (in Simon 318) that says that case is different, since you hadn't cause it to become prohibited with your own hands. Only when you cause the Issur, like when you light a fire, does R' Shimon agree that there is Muktza because it's Ussur.

SEIF 2 (CONTINUED)

DRIED FIGS AND RAISONS

R' Shimon agrees that figs and grapes that are left to dry out are Muktza. Since they have both conditions of Muktza, that you personally pushed them away from use plus they became inedible in the meanwhile. Other fruit that are left to dry out are not Muktza, though you personally left them to dry, they never become inedible while drying out. Dates that fell off the tree before they're ripe (and became ripe on Shabbos,) are not Muktza. Though in the beginning of Shabbos they were inedible, since you never personally pushed them away from use (rather they were naturally unusable) it doesn't become Muktza.

(See Mishna Brurah 9 that quotes Rashi that the dates are edible somewhat. It would seem to imply that if it wasn't edible it would be Muktza. This is hard to understand why this should be since there is no personally pushing it away from use, which is one of the conditions for Muktza according to R' Shimon.)

SEIF 2 (CONTINUED)

FOOD MUKTZA

The Rambam writes that R' Shimon holds there is no Muktza for food besides dried figs and raisins. Food that are put away to be used as merchandise or put away in storage are not Muktza. The Tosfos Shabbos explains: Though they're set aside not to be eaten, still, the owner doesn't conclusively decide never to eat it, but he would partake in it if needed.

The same applies to kernels of wheat that are planted, that they're not Muktza (as long as they didn't take root.) The Magen Avraham (through the explanation of the Machtzes Hashekel) quotes a Mahrashal that holds it's Muktza. We see that the Gemara considers the wheat to R' Shimon to be a bigger reason to be Muktza than a candle that was lit on Shabbos. Since the candle we know will go out eventually by itself on Shabbos, so it's not as Muktza as the wheat which will never loose it's status of being planted by itself. Since we don't Paskin like R' Shimon regarding the candle, so much more we should forbid the planted wheat on Shabbos.

The Magen Avraham argues and says, even though to R' Shimon that allows candles that went out on Shabbos the wheat is more stringent, but to us that doesn't hold of R' Shimon by candles, the wheat is more lenient. The candles are forbidden because, by lighting them, you made them forbidden to use for anything else while they're lit. The wheat, since they may be removed, they don't have the condition that they're presently unusable, and therefore not Muktza.

The Tosfos Shabbos wants to say this is a Machlokes between the Tosfos and the Tur. Tosfos forbids a Jew to remove on Shabbos a seed that was planted. Therefore the wheat also has a forbidden status on it and is unusable as is. Since it has both condition, unusable and was personally put in such a position, it's Muktza. The Tur that says it's not Muktza is consistent to his Shita that allows a Jew to remove seeds that were planted as long as they didn't take root. Since it's permitted in it's present form, it's not Muktza.

SEIF 2 (CONTINUED)

ATTACHED FRUIT

Fruits that were still attached to the tree Bein Hashmashes are Muktza even if they came off. Even though, apparently, he didn't put the fruit in that situation, which normally we Paskin that once it becomes usable it's not Muktza anymore, over here it's different. Rashi explains, since you had the opportunity to pick the fruit on Friday, and you didn't, it's like putting it in the situation to be left attached and therefore remains Muktza. The Bais Yosef explains that even if the case was that he didn't have the ability (for whatever reason) to pick the fruit on Friday, still, the Rabanan didn't want to differentiate between attached fruit and forbid all of them.

The Ran quotes the Baal Maor that we see that though R' Shimon permits a candle that went out on Shabbos, (which we Paskin not like him,) he agrees by a large lamp (who's fuel would last the whole Shabbos,) that it remains Muktza even if it goes out. Since someone is not looking forward for when it would go out, since he expects it to last the whole Shabbos, it remains Muktza. So too attached fruit, since nobody is expecting them to come off on Shabbos, all agree that it remains Muktza.

SEIF 2 (CONTINUED)

OBJECTS OF GOYIM

The Ran quotes the Yerushalmi that a Goy doesn't decide to set aside any objects from use on Shabbos, therefore his objects are not Muktza. (The general idea is since the Goyim do not have the same restrictions on Shabbos, therefore even things that we have no way to make useful, they can, therefore they never have any reason not to expect to use the object on Shabbos.)

The Taz and Gra both say that attached fruit from Erev Shabbos, even if it belongs to a Goy, it's still Muktza. The Gra explains because the Chachumim enacted to prohibit all attached fruit from Erev Shabbos and didn't want to differentiate between the different circumstances. The Magen Avraham and Tosfos Shabbos say that Nolad, when applies, applies by a Goy's object too (since it wasn't in existence Bein Hashmashes Friday night, it wasn't set aside at that time for the Goy's use either.)

The Rama permits a Goy's drying raisins and figs, since there is no Muktza by their objects. The Bais Meir (brought in the Mishna Brura) asks how can this be? Since it's not fit to eat (and cannot be made fit to eat through man's intervention,) how can it be any more fit by being in the Goy's possession? The Shaar Hatzion offers an answer that the Rama only permits those raisins and figs that were that were partially edible Bain Hashmashes. Since they weren't fully edible, if they belong to a Jew, they would need to specifically pronounce their intentions to eat them on Shabbos (as we'll explain in future Shiurim.) But for a Goy, since he doesn't need to specifically make something not Muktza, as long as it's technically usable, it's not Muktza.

SEIF 3

MUKTZA FOR PART OF SHABBOS

We Paskin if something is Muktza Bein Hashmashes, it remains Muktza for the whole Shabbos. But if Bain Hashmashes it was fine, it just became not unusable during Shabbos, if it becomes usable again on Shabbos, there is a Shaila in Mesechta Beitza whether the object remains Muktza or not. Rashi explains the case to be raisins or dried figs that was completely dry before Shabbos and are edible. During Shabbos, rains fell and bloated them until they're inedible. If the sun then shined and dried them up again, therefore making them edible again, the Shaila is are you allowed to eat it?

The Rosh says that the Shaila is only regarding food if it's Muktza to eat. Other objects that become Muktza during Shabbos and thus only a question of moving it, of course there it's not Muktza after the reason for it being Muktza passes. This we learn from the case of a chick that jumps on an upside down basket on Shabbos. Though while the chick's on top of it it's Bosis to the chick and you cannot move it , when the chick descends, you may move the basket.

The Gemara has two versions whether it remains Muktza or not. The Rishonim Paskined to be lenient by an Issur Dirabanan.

SEIF 3 (CONTINUED)

THE MILA KNIFE

If there was a Mila on Shabbos, the Mahrshal allowed the moving of the Mila knife after the Mila was performed, since we Paskin there is no Muktza for half of Shabbos. He writes that it's not comparable to a spit that becomes Muktza after you roast on it on Yom Tov (though it wasn't Muktza before that) since it becomes disgusting to use after the roasting. It's also not comparable to the raisins that became ruined on Shabbos that it's Muktza, that's because it's unusable at this time. The Mila knife is always usable after the Mila, since you can use it for eating.

The Taz argues. He says, first of all, a Mila knife also is not too appetizing to eat with. Secondly, we see in the case of a wheat-crushing board that may be moved on Yom Tov to butcher meat on it. But after you already cut the meat on it, it reverts to being Muktza. The same we see from the spit. That it was Muktza Bein Hashmashes. They permit using it on Yom Tov, and right afterwards, it reverts back to it's original Muktza that it had Bein Hashmashes. They only permitted moving it so it wouldn't get lost. They were afraid if they didn't allow you to move it so it wouldn't get lost, you would refrain from using it on Yom Tov.

The Magen Avraham (in Simon 331) also forbids moving the knife after the Mila. He says that it's now Muktza Machmas Chesaron Kis (that you refrain from using it because it might get ruined.) Though this Muktza wasn't on it before, since you need to use it for the Mila, it's like any usable object on Shabbos that comes unusable (like food that spoils) that if presently it's in a state of not being able to be used, then it's Muktza.

SEIF 3 (CONTINUED)

THE MILA KNIFE (CONTINUED)

We already said in last Shiur that the Magen Avraham holds that the knife after the Mila is Muktza. However, he says that as long as the knife is still in his hands, he may move it afterwards to be put in a safe place. This is like all other Muktza that you're allowed to move once it got into your hand. The Elya Rabba even permits handing it to a friend. This he compares to the Yerushalmi that you may hand over a Luluv after you're finished the Mitzva, which the Yerushalmi considers to be Muktza, to someone else to put it away.

The Elya Rabba doesn't agree with the proofs of the Taz (brought in the last Shiur.) The Mila knife, from the time of Bein Hashmashes, you know that you'll need to use it for a Mila, therefore it's not Muktza. The wheat-crushing board and the spit, there is no guarantee that you'll use them on Yom Tov, therefore they never got a status of a non Muktza item Bein Hashmashes. Therefore they're always Muktza and can only be moved through a special Heter that they allow moving certain Muktza items to prepare the Yom Tov Seuda.

The Rama in Yora Deah also permits moving the knife the whole day. So does the Nekudas Hakesef (Shach.) He says that the wheat-crushing board is different because it's not meant for cutting meat on it, rather for wheat crushing, which cannot be done on Yom Tov, therefore it's Muktza. The Mila knife is meant for Mila, which is permitted on Shabbos, therefore it remains a permitted item for the whole Shabbos. (He answers the case of the spit that it becomes disgusting right after roasting so it's actual Muktza.)