Q&A: The Tradition Regarding the Laws of Muktzeh
The Tradition Regarding the Laws of Muktzeh
Question
Hello, honorable Rabbi.
Thank you very much for giving of your time and answering all the questions here on the site.
The Sages enacted that it is forbidden to move muktzeh on the Sabbath. How can it be that some muktzeh prohibitions, which are forbidden according to Rabbi Yehuda, are permitted according to Rabbi Shimon?
In other words, how can there be a dispute that this was included in the decree and that was not?
Does that mean that Rabbi Shimon seemingly did not receive these prohibitions through the tradition? (After all, at some stage they both learned from the same teacher, Rabbi Akiva, didn’t they?)
When the Sages instituted the enactment, were they not clear or unambiguous enough?
Because this prohibition is not learned from a verse or from something that can be disputed. It would seem that if there is a dispute in this law, that can only apparently mean that the tradition was not transmitted properly.
Thank you very much.
Answer
First of all, it is possible that these enactments were instituted in their own time—at least some of them. Regarding the decree about utensils, there is a detailed discussion in the chapter “Kol HaKelim,” from the days of Nehemiah son of Hacaliah…
Beyond that, indeed, it is possible that it was not entirely clear what exactly had been enacted. Another possibility is that this dispute was ancient, and Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Shimon are the ones who preserved it. There are quite a few cases like that. Even the dispute over Rashi and Rabbeinu Tam phylacteries—where the question arises even more sharply (what, Rabbeinu Tam didn’t see what his grandfather put on?)—is answered in the same way. In the excavations at Masada, they found Rabbeinu Tam phylacteries. That means this is an ancient dispute, and nowadays it is associated with the names of Rashi and Rabbeinu Tam.