| If my child is carrying a
stone in his hand, may I lift him up? Is it as if I am carrying the stone as well? The Shulchan Aruch 1 teaches us that if a child is
yearning for his father, the father may pick him up even though the child is holding a
stone in his hand. However, he says, that this is on condition that the child would become
ill if not lifted up. The reason it is otherwise forbidden is because it is considered as
if the father himself is holding the stone. If the child would not become ill, even though
the child is yearning for his father it is forbidden to lift him as long as he is holding muktze.
Tosefos in Shabbos 142a asks that one should
first make the child discard the stone and only then pick him up. Tosefos answers
that the child would cry if he were made to discard the stone.
In other words we have a chain reaction: the child may be
lifted while holding muktze if he would become ill, and the muktze need not
be discarded if the child would cry.
What if he is carrying money?
The Shulchan Aruch continues that if the child is
holding money 2 it is forbidden to pick him up even though the child
would become sick, because if the money would fall from the child’s hand the father
would stoop and pick it up, which involves handling muktze directly. In contrast,
if the stone would fall from the child’s hand the father would not be
concerned enough about it to pick it up. (It does not mean that one must stand idly by
while his child becomes sick, it means that lifting him with money in his hand is
forbidden and it is up to the parent to either make him discard the money or substitute it
for something else).
Rashi holds that even holding the child’s hand
is forbidden if he is holding money lest the money falls and the father will pick it up,
but the Ramban disagrees and permits it.
The Elya Raba (quoted by the Bi’ur Halacha)
says that the Ramban can be relied upon where a case of illness is involved.
If a bowl of fruit has a stone inside
it as well, am I permitted to lift the bowl?
The Shulchan Aruch 3 continues that one
is forbidden to lift a bowl of fruit with a stone inside it as well. The reason is because
Chazal forbade carrying muktze even through another item. This is called tiltul
min hatsad – indirect handling, and it is also forbidden.
As to the correct handling of the bowl, the gemora
lays down certain rules, which are true for all handling of muktze through tiltul
min hatsad.
|
One only requires the bowl |
One requires the bowl and the fruit |
One requires the space the bowl is occupying |
| Hard
fruit 4 |
Must tip out the bowl’s contents |
Tip out the bowl and gather the fruit |
May carry the bowl with the fruit and the stone inside |
Soft
or
overripe fruit 5 |
May carry the bowl as it is |
May carry the bowl as it is |
May carry the bowl as it is |
The muktze item which in this case is the stone,
must be tipped whenever feasible. Therefore when there are hard fruit in the bowl, the
contents must be tipped out and the fruit gathered back into the bowl.
If the fruit are soft and will spoil if tipped out, one may
carry the bowl as it is.
If one needs the space the bowl is occupying and tipping
the contents will not alleviate the problem because the stone will land in the required
space, the bowl with its contents may be carried as they are.
The Shulchan Aruch HaRav 6 asks why is it
that the bowl may be carried with the stone inside (when the fruit are ripe and soft) and
the child may not be lifted up when carrying the stone unless he is yearning terribly for
his father?
He answers that Chazal permitted carrying muktze
indirectly when one requires the permitted article, provided that he cannot discard the muktze,
but to lift the permitted item unnecessarily is forbidden because of the muktze.
Therefore, since the father is not interested in lifting the child at that particular
moment, it is forbidden to do so, unless the child is yearning for his father.
[1] Simon 309:1. These halachos are based on
the gemora Shabbos 141b – 142a, and is worthwhile seeing it inside.
[2] It makes sense that we are referring to money that would disturb the father if it were
to remain on the floor. If however the coin is of insignificant value and the father would
normally not stoop to pick it up, it would have then the same rule as a stone.
[3] Simon 309:3.
[4] Hard fruit will not spoil if tipped out of the bowl.
[5] Soft fruit will spoil if tipped out of the bowl.
[6] Simon 309:1.
Food For Thought
If I forgot money on my pillow
before Shabbos, is my pillow muktze?
What am I supposed to do with it? May I
tilt it into a drawer?
Does the Shabbos table become muktze
because of the Shabbos candles?
Is a drawer with money, or other muktze
items, muktze?
Answers coming next week.
Vort on the Parsha
Rashi tells us that Bilam saw that the tent
openings were not facing each other and a Ruach of Hashem descended upon him. The
explanation might be that Bilam had set out to harm Bnei Yisroel by implanting a wedge of
hatred between fellow Jews. When he saw each Jew content with himself and with his own and
would not look at his neighbor’s possessions, there was no place for him to place a
wedge between fellow Jews because there was no division at all. The consequence of
beholding such beauty is Ruach Hashem. |
