To purchase this Sefer, click here
4. Muktzah Machmas Chisaron Kis-Items of value which are only used for their set purpose:
This [type of Muktzah to be discussed in this Halacha] is called Muktzah Machmas Chisaron Kis.
A. The law of items defined as MMC”K:
Forbidden to move for space, use or prevention of damage: It is forbidden to move a MMC”K item on Shabbos even if one needs its space. Meaning that [even] if one needs to use for a certain use the space that is under this object [it is nevertheless forbidden to be moved]. As well, [it is forbidden to move it] in order to use the body [of vessel]. Meaning [even] if [on Shabbos] one changed his mind and decided to use the body of the vessel for a certain use [then it is nevertheless forbidden to be moved]. [It goes without saying that one may not move the object to save it from damage.]
B. Its definition:
Vessels that one is not particular against using: Vessels which one set aside to not be used [at all] for any purpose, such as for example vessels which are ready and waiting to be sold, with which it is not common to use them for any type of usage [in order not to damage the merchandise], nevertheless if he is not particular against using them, then [since] he has still not removed his mind from them completely, [meaning he has not completely removed his mind] from using them, therefore they do not have the status of Muktzah to be forbidden to be moved. [See Q&A 1] However the above only refers to items which are an actual vessel, however items which are not actually a vessel, but were given the status of a vessel being that they are useable for certain uses on Shabbos, such as for example shears of wool which are useable to lean and sit on, and the like, then if one placed them in the storage to be sold, one has nullified the status of a vessel which was upon it, and it is thus forbidden to move them, even if he is not particular at all against using them, unless one goes back and designates them for a permanent use.
Vessels which one is particular not to use: All vessels which are waiting to be sold, and one is particular to not use them for any purpose, [then] even if they are not very expensive vessels, and certainly if they are very expensive vessels, [are defined as MMC”K, even if they are Milachto Liheter].
Food: Any item that is fit to be eaten on Shabbos is not considered Muktzah, even if it is designated to be sold, such as for instance, dates and almonds and other fruits which are designated to be taken to be sold in another area, one is permitted to eat from them on Shabbos, even if one physically set them aside from being eaten on Shabbos, such as wheat which one planted in the ground, it is permitted to eat from it on Shabbos, if it has not yet rooted [into the ground]. [This is with exception to figs and grapes which are in the drying process, as will be explained under the section of MM”G.]
The reason foods are not Muktzah: They are not similar to other items which one physically sets aside being that even though one has physically set them aside one has not removed his mind from them completely.
- Expensive items designated for only forbidden use:
[Furthermore] if they are very expensive vessels, then even if they are not waiting to be sold [but are privately owned] and they are designated for a prohibited use, and one is particular against using them for other uses in order so that their value not decrease, then [they are defined as MMC”K]
- Inexpensive items/Items set aside in a specific place which are designated for only forbidden use:
[A bed which] was designated for money [to be placed on] and one did an action of placing money on it even one time during the week, it is forbidden to move [the bed] on Shabbos even in order to use it, or [to use] its space.
The reason for this prohibition: It is not similar to other vessels that are designated for a prohibited use, which are permitted to be moved in order to use it [for a permitted purpose] and [in order to use] its space, as one is not particular with these items to not use them for other permitted purposes. However this bed that is designated for the money one is particular regarding [using] it, and designates a [set] place for it so it not be used for any other purpose, and it is thus similar to Muktzah Machmas Chisaron Kis, which is forbidden to be moved even in order to use it and its space, as explained in chapter 308 [Halacha 4. This will be explained in B].
Other Opinions: There are opinions which argue on this and allow [the bed] to be moved in order to use it or its space, just as [is the law] by other vessels that are designated for forbidden use.
The Final Ruling: One should be stringent like the first opinion. [If however the bed is designated also for other items [that are not Mukztah] then the bed is considered MMI and not MMCK.]
C. If one decided before Shabbos to use the item on Shabbos:
([However] this only applies if he changed his mind after Shabbos already began, however if [already] changed his mind from before Shabbos to use it [for another purpose], then it is permitted to move it being that one’s intentions helps regarding Muktzah [to change its Muktzah status], as will be explained).
Ruling of Admur in Kuntrus Achron: If one changed his mind to use the MMCK object for a use that is common for this object, meaning that most people use it for this purpose, and not the current purpose of the object, then the MMCK loses its Mukztah status. If however one changed his mind to use it for an uncommon use, meaning that most people don’t use it for this new purpose, but rather for the old purpose, then simply thinking of this matter does not help remove its MMCK status and rather an actual action is required to be done towards it. Alternatively, if one did an action to cause the object to become an MMCK then he must also perform an action to remove it from this status.
If one thought of using an MMCK object before Shabbos for a different purpose than its designated use, then it is no longer MMCK for that Shabbos. [However if this purpose is not the common purpose of use for this item, or if one did an action to make this item become MMCK, then elsewhere Admur rules that simple though does not suffice and an actual action must be performed.]
Does the above MMCK object which one decided to no longer be particular in its use before Shabbos become non-Muktzah or MMI?
If one did not designate the item for the new use then it remains MMI. If one designated it to now be used for its new permitted use on Shabbos, then it is not Muktzah at all.
D. Examples of items which have the status of Muktzah Machamas Chisaron Kis:
Knives used for Shechita, Bris, Barber, Sofer: A knife for slaughtering and for a Bris Mila, and scissors of a barber, and the knife of writers of scrolls which are used to straighten out the quills, since they are particularly to not use it for any other purpose which is permitted on Shabbos, [therefore] it is prohibited to move them even [if one changed his mind on Shabbos and decided] to use them [for something] and [even if one needs to use] the space [that is under this object]. [Furthermore] even if this knife is stuck into a casing together with other [regular-non-Muktzah] knives, then we [still] do not say that] most probably he is not particular at all about [using] this knife [for other purposes] since he placed this knife into the casing together with the other knives.
Is a Mila knife Muktzah on a Shabbos Bris? A Mila knife is Muktzah Machmas Chisaron Kis and is forbidden to be moved with exception to moving it for the Mila. It may not be moved to hide [after the Mila], and not even for its space or use, and certainly not for no need at all as is written in chapter 308 [Halacha 5].
Hiding the knife while still in the Mohels hand: Nevertheless while the Mila knife is still within the Mohels hand after having circumcised with it he is permitted to carry it to any place of his wish and hide it there, as is explained there [308/13].
Washing off the knife: However it is forbidden to wash it even while in his hand as it is forbidden to wash vessels on Shabbos unless they serve a use for that day, as is explained in chapter 323 [Halacha 6]
A chisel which one is particular not to use for other purposes: A chisel that is used to crush spices, in areas that one is careful not to use it for any other purpose in order so it not get dirty, is [considered under the category of] Muktzah Machamas Chisaron Kis. However in places that people are not particular [against using it for other purposes] then it is permitted to move it in order to use it or in order to use the space that it under it, just like [is the law by] all other vessels which are designated for a purpose that is prohibited to do on Shabbos, as will be explained.
Blank paper: Similarly blank paper which is designated for writing on is Muktzah Machamas Chisaron Kis, being that one is particular to not use it for any other purpose in order so that it not get dirty. Furthermore, [another reason that it is Muktzah is] since one is particular to not to use it [for anything other than writing], [therefore] it does not at all have a status of a vessel [and is thus Muktzah], as will be explained. [See Q&A]
May one move a wallet on Shabbos that does not have money in it? [Based on the above ruling in B regarding inexpensive items which one is particular not to use for other matters] one may not move a wallet [on Shabbos], even if he has removed the money from it from before Shabbos, unless one did an action, [such as] to [tear] open its bottom [part which holds the money] and [thus] uproot its designation.
The law of a clothing that has a money pouch sewed into it: Nevertheless a money pouch which is sewed onto a clothing, since the main purpose that the clothing is designated for is to be worn, [therefore] if one removes the money from [the pouch, before Shabbos] one may wear the clothing, as the pouch is nullified to it. [Furthermore] one may even place an item into the pouch, or take an item out of it, as its Muktzah status is only due to the fact that one is particular to not use it for any other use, [thus] here [that] we see that he is not particular [to use it for other purposes, it therefore is not considered to be set aside by him, and is not Muktzah]. (However this requires further study being that based on this reasoning the pouch should become completely permitted [to be moved, even when not attached to the clothing])
Are boards Muktzah? The boards of an ordinary person are allowed to be moved, [although] of a professional are forbidden [to be moved], as [professionals] are particular with them to not use them for any other use in order so that they not get ruined. [They are thus] Muktzah Machmas Chisaron Kis. [However] if he thought about the boards before Shabbos to [use them to] place bread on them for guests on Shabbos, or [he thought about using them] for another use, then it is permitted to be moved.
E. What is the status of the pieces of a MMC”K vessel that shattered on Shabbos?
A vessel that is Muktzah Machmas Chisaron Kis which broke, on Shabbos or Yom Tov, remains forbidden to move them that day. [See Halacha 9 where this Halacha is brought in full.]
Summary of Muktzah Machmas Chisaron Kis [MMC“K]:
Any vessel which one is careful not to use is defined as MMC”K. For example:
1. Merchandise: Items of merchandise that one sets aside to be sold and is particular not to use them for any purpose lest they become damaged, are MMC”K regardless of its monetary value or intended usage. 
2. Expensive items: An expensive item which is Milachto L’issur and one is thus careful to not use it for anything other than its intended purpose, due to fear of damage, is considered MMC“K.
3. Any vessel which is designated [for a forbidden use, such as] to hold a Muktzah item and it has held that item once in the past, such as a wallet which is designated for holding money and one had entered money into one time before Shabbos, then if one is careful not to use it for other [non-Muktzah] things, and it has been designated to a specific space, it has the status of MMC”K even if there is no money currently inside it.
If an item is not used for anything other than its forbidden use due to repulsiveness: Such as an earthenware lamp, it nevertheless retains the status of MM”I as opposed to being completely Muktzah.
Foods: All edible foods which are set aside from being used for anything, whether because one plans to sell them, or because he wants the food to further develop or ripen, or because he wants to dry the food, then it is nevertheless not Muktzah, with exception of figs and grapes which are set aside to dry, of which they are considered Muktzah Machmas Gufo until they become edible for all people.
Any item which falls into the above definition may never be moved on Shabbos – not L’gufo (to use) or Limkomo (for its place) and certainly not L’atzmo (to save from possible damage).
If one designated it for a permitted use before Shabbos: If one had in mind before Shabbos to use the item for other than its set purpose, it has a status of Milachto L’issur and not of Chisaron Kis.
If a MMC”K vessel breaks: If a Chisaron Kis vessel breaks, its pieces remain the same status of Muktzah, as will be explained in Halacha 9.
Examples Of Chisaron Kis vessels:
1. A Knife of Mila, Shechita, Safrus, or a special scissor for cutting hair.
2. An expensive pen that one is particular on.
3. A wallet even when empty of all contents. However a money pouch that is sewed to ones clothing is not Muktzah when empty being that it is nullified to the clothing which is made to wear, and thus one may enter other items into it on Shabbos.
4. A chisel used for grinding which one is particular to not use for any other purpose so it not get dirty.
5. Blank paper [regarding if it remains Muktzah even today that paper is no longer expensive see Q&A]
6. Wooden boards which belong to professional builders.
7. Merchandise which one is careful not to use (except for food)
The following examples are mentioned in Shemiras Shabbos Kihilchasa chapter 20 laws 19-23:
2. Stereo system
4. Parchment of a scribe
5. Bus pass
6. Documents which are forbidden to read on Shabbos that one is careful to keep such as bills etc.
7. Checks or money
8. Regarding a clock see Q&A
9. Regarding a picture on the wall see Q&A
10. Heavy closet [see Q&A]
11. New unattached Tzitzis strings
12. Pesach vessels during the year.
13. Matzas Mitzvah on Erev Pesach that falls on Shabbos [See Q&A]
14. A butcher knife
Is a Mila knife Muktzah on a Shabbos Bris?
The knife remains Muktzah and may thus only be moved for the purpose of the Bris. However it need not be immediately placed down after the Mila and rather may be brought by the Mohel, while he is still holding it, to a safe area for it to be kept. It is forbidden to wash the blood off the knife.
Is Chisaron Kis defined according to each person’s personal assessment of the item or is it in accordance to how the general society treats it?
One is to follow the individual and not the community. Thus if the an individual is not particular on a certain MM”I item that is expensive, to use it for other usages, then it is not Mukztah for him [but is Muktzah for others that are particular] However if the owner of the item is particular then it is Mukztah for the entire world, even for other that are not particular.
Is an inexpensive item which one is particular against using for matters other than its intent, considered Muktzah Machmas Chisaron Kis?
Yes, as the main point is that one is careful to avoid using it for any purpose on Shabbos [See footnote for analysis].
Is blank paper today considered Muktzah?
Plain loose leaf paper: Is Muktzah being that it is designated only for writing. However there are Poskim which rule it is permitted being that people today are not particular to use a single piece of paper for only writing.
Expensive paper: Is Muktzah according to all.
Blank pad or booklet: Is Muktzah according to all.
Pad or booklet which has some written pages and some blank: Some opinions rule [that if it contains material which is permitted to be read on Shabbos then] it is not Muktzah being that one does not remove his mind from using it. Other opinions rule that it remains Muktzah, even if it includes words of Torah. Others rule that it is dependent on the written content; as if the content is of importance to the person then the pad is not Muktzah. In any event one should refrain from moving the blank pages. [Regarding using blank paper if no toilet paper is available, see “The Laws of Cutting and tearing items on Shabbos”]
If Muktzah paper was intentionally placed on a Sefer does that Sefer become Muktzah? Muktzah papers [such as a blank paper which one intends to use to write on] are not to be placed into Sefarim, and if placed with intent to remain throughout Shabbos then that Sefer becomes a Basis and is Muktzah. See Halacha 11 for the full details of this subject!
Are expensive decorations or items of sentimental value, which people avoid using for any purpose considered MMC”K?
Items which one is particular to never use: Some Poskim rule that they are considered Muktzah MC”K being that one is particular to not use them at all. Other Poskim rule that it is not Muktzah being that it is not designated for a forbidden purpose. It is unclear from Admur as to whether in his opinion these items are Muktzah or not.
Items which one uses on occasion: Such as an expensive dish which one uses on fancy occasion, according to all opinions is not Muktzah.
– Are dollars which one received from the Lubavitcher Rebbe Muktzah?
Perhaps they should be considered designated for a permitted use, such as are decorative items. Vetzaruch Iyun.
– Is an Identification card Muktzah?
No. As in a time of need it is permitted to be read on Shabbos, just as are newspapers being they have a need for one’s body. Vetzaruch Iyun as seemingly there is no allowance for one himself to read it.
– Is a stamp collection Muktzah?
No. As they have been designated for collection purposes, which is similar to decorations. However according to those which rule expensive decorations are Muktzah then here too these items would be Muktzah.
– Are sports cards Muktzah?
No. As they have been designated for collection purposes, which is similar to decorations. Vetzaruch Iyun as there is no allowance for one to read it. According to those which rule expensive decorations are Muktzah then here too these items would certainly be Muktzah.
– Is a sticker album Muktzah?
No. As they have been designated for collection purposes, which is similar to decorations. However, one may not remove the stickers from the album due to the Koreia prohibition.
Is an item which has a designated place and is not moved from there, considered Muktzah MC”K?
See previous Q&A and footnote there.
–Are clocks, and pictures which are set on the wall Muktzah?
Some Poskim forbid moving it for any purpose. However seemingly this matter is subject to the dispute mentioned in Q&A 4 in which some learn that according to Admur it is not MMC”K-see there [Nevertheless even according to this understanding of Admur wall clocks would at the very least be MM”I.]
–Are closets and book cases which are designated to a specific area Muktzah?
Many Poskim forbid moving it. However seemingly this matter is subject to the dispute mentioned in Q&A 4 in which some learn that according to Admur it is permitted-see there!
Is a safe considered MMC”K?
If used to store money then it is similar to a money mattress that has a designated space which is MMCK.
Is Matzah considered Muktzah on Shabbos that falls on Erev Pesach?
Matzas Mitzvah: The Matzos that are baked on Erev Pesach past midday, which are designated to be eaten on the night of Seder, are considered Muktzah according to most Poskim.
Other Matzos: The Matzah that is not designated for the Seder night is not Muktzah, even though that it may not be eaten until after Shabbos.
According to the Chabad custom to avoid Matzah 30 days before Pesach would the Matzas Mitzvah be Muktzah on all the Shabbosim that fall 30 days before Pesach?
The Matzas are not Muktzah.
Is a Pasul Sefer Torah Muktzah?
Some Poskim rule the Sefer Torah may have a status of Muktzah MC”K.
May one remove a Pasul Sifreiy Torah to dance with by Hakafos?
The custom is to also dance with the Pasul Sifreiy Torah, and they are not considered Muktzah in this regard. Nevertheless one may not deliberately leave a Pasul Sefer Torah in the Aron for this purpose, and hence a Sefer Torah which cannot be fixed is to be placed in Genizah. This is opposed to the general custom which allows leaving Pasul Sifrei Torah to use for Hakafos.
Are candlesticks considered Muktzah?
Some Poskim hold that expensive candlesticks are considered Muktzah MC”K. For a full analysis on this subject and the final ruling, please refer to Halacha 5G!
Q&A on Merchandise
Is Merchandise with which one is not particular against using considered a Keli Shemilachto Leisur?
This matter requires further clarification.
Is merchandise that is common to be sold on Shabbos in a permitted way considered MMCK? Is merchandice of disposable plates etc considered MMCK? May one give it to some one in need on Shabbos?
This matter requires further analysis.
Are Sefarim which are designated to be sold, such as at a book store, or old manuscripts, considered Muktzah?
No. They have the same law as do food of merchandise which is not Muktzah.
Is a manuscript of words of Torah which is meant for editing considered Muktzah?
If it is designated only for editing and not learning: Then it is MM”I as it is designated only for writing on. It is permitted to be read on Shabbos for learning purposes, although for editing purposes it is forbidden to read it. However there are some Poskim which are stringent that one should not read such manuscripts at all.
If it is designated for both learning and editing: Then it is not Muktzah at all. Although it is forbidden to read it for editing purposes.
Are clothing and other merchandise which are designated to be sold considered Muktzah?
If one is particular to not use them for any purpose lest they get damaged then they are MMC”K.
Is an esrog Muktzah?
Esrogim designated as merchandise: If the owner is particular to not use it for any purpose [such as not even to smell] then they are MMC”K.
Esrogim of personal use: Esrogim which one has bought for personal use are not Muktzah on Shabbos as they are fit to be smelled. This applies likewise on Shabbos Chol Hamoed, as although they may not be smelled during Sukkos, including Shabbos Chol Hamoed, nevertheless they are not Muktzah.
Hadassim: Hadassim of personal use are not Muktzah on the Shabbosim prior to Sukkos, although is Muktzah on Shabbos Chol Hamoed.
Lulav/Aravos: Is always Muktzah on Shabbos, whether of merchandise or personal use, whether Shabbos Chol Hamoed or other Shabbosim. They are considered MM”G.
 Admur 308:3-6; Michaber 308:1
 Admur 308:4
 Admur 308:3; M”A 308:3; M”B 308:7
 Admur 308:4; Rama 308:1
 This implies that if the merchandise is even at times used by the owner, then it is no longer MMC”K and is rather like the status of merchandise described in the previous part of this Halacha discussing merchandise which is uncommon to be used. This wording is implied specifically in Admur, as the Shulchan Aruch simply writes “particular” rather than “particular to not use at all for any other purpose” thus leaving room for question. This ruling follows the ruling of the Chazon Ish 42:16; Divrei Yoel 19, in contrast to the ruling of the Avnei Nezer 402 which differentiates between whether it’s used as a normal object or used only in rare times.
 Implication of Admur ibid; Tehila Ledavid 308:1
The reason: As a) One has no use for it on Shabbos, and it is hence off one’s mind. This is unlike a non-merchandice item which is Milachto Liheter in which case it is still on one’s mind to use for its Heter purpose. B) The fact that it is means to be sold is itself “Milachto Liisur”.
 Admur 310:2
 Lit. “pushed them away with his hands from eating on Shabbos”
 As even so one still has in mind to eat them when he wishes. [M”B 310:4]
 Admur 308:4; Michaber 308:1 mentions “Makpidim-Particular”; M”A 308:3 mentions “expensive”
 As opposed to Melachto Leheter. So rules: Admur ibid; Shut Rosh 22:8; Tehila Ledavid 308:1; Ketzos Hashulchan 108:13; Toras Shabbos 308:2; SSH”K 20:19; See Piskeiy Teshuvos 308:2
Background: This wording of Admur ibid “Keli Shemilachto Li’isur” is in addition to the words of the Magen Avraham [308:3] which simply states that expensive items are Muktzah, and does not differentiate between whether they are designated for permitted or forbidden use. The Toras Shabbos [308:2] proceeds to question the M”A due to his statements implication that even Melachto Liheter would be forbidden if expensive. Thus Admur explicitly negates this thought. The reason it is only Muktzah if designated for forbidden use: Logically it seems that an object which one uses for permissible matters would not be Muktzah since one hasn’t set his mind away from the object for Shabbos as on Shabbos he may use it. This is opposed to objects used for forbidden matters that one doesn’t plan on having anything to do with it on Shabbos.
Regarding expensive decorations-See Q&A!
 Admur 310:12; Yeish Omrim in Rama 310:7 in name of Rabbeinu Tam; M”A 310:5; M”B 310:35-37
Other opinions: Some Poskim rule that even according to the stringent opinion the bed is only forbidden to move to save from damage, like a Keli Shemilachto Liissur. [Rama 310:7] The M”A ibid severly questions this opinion of the Rama and concludes as stated in Admur above, and so rules also M”B ibid, that according to the stringent opinion it is completely Muktzah like MMCK.
Ruling of Admur in 279: Vetzaruch Iyun from 279:4 which implies that only when the conditions of a Basis are fulfilled is it considered Muktzah. While here it implies that all vessels designated for a Muktzah item are Muktzah. However one can simply answer that there it refers to a case that it one is not particular against using it for anything else and it is rather simply only manufactured for that purpose.
 Rif 21a; Rabbeinu Yerucham 83
 Elya Raba 310:8; Beis Meir; M”B 310:37
 308:4; ruled also in 308:59; Michaber 308:26
Background: In 308:4 Admur rules in parenthese that thought before Shabbos helps remove the MMCK object from its Mukztah status. Seemingly the reason for placing this law in parenthese is as follows: The removal of Hakpada from an MMCK object from before Shabbos is not explicitly discussed in the Michaber. However in Michaber 308:26 he writes that the boards of a crafts man are Muktzah unless he thinks of using them before Shabbos. Admur in 308:59 explains that the boards are generally MMCK because the crafts man is Makpid not to use it for any other use. Hence from here we learn that thought alone does suffice to remove the object from its MMCK status. Nevertheless in Kuntrus Achron 259:1 Admur differentiates between this board case and other possible cases. He states there that only by boards which he did not do an action to make them become MMCK and most people are not Makpid, does mere thought help. However if one did an action to make it become MMCK, or it is common for people to be Makpid, then a mere thought does not help and an action is required. This is similar to the ruling of MMG that if it is not common to designate an MMG for a certain use then one must do an action to make it receive a vessel status. Veztaruch Iyun as in 308:4 Admur rules clearly that thought helps and does not differentiate in this matter, although nevertheless this would explain the reason behind the parenthese there.
 Admur 259:1
 Admur 308:5
 Admur 331:10
 This follows the ruling of the Taz:Magen Avraham in 331 that even on a Shabbos Bris the knife is Muktzah. However the Rama and Shach Yoreh Deah 266:2 rule that the knife is not Muktzah at all as something cannot be Muktzah for only part of Shabbos. The M”B 310:15 rules that in a time of need, such as there is suspicion of robbery, one may rely on this lenient opinion to hide the knife even after one already placed it down. The Sheivet Haleivi [4:135] rules likewise saying that majority of Poskim are lenient.
 Admur 308:6
 See Q&A 4
 Admur 308:6; M”A 308:10 in name of Shiltei Giborim 8; M”B 308:3
 The Peri Megadim writes that if one is not particular against using the paper for other uses, then it is not Muktzah [Ashel Avraham 308:10]
 Vetzaruch Iyun if money is defined as both MMG and MMCK
 Admur 310:12
 Admur 310:13
 Admur 308:59
 Admur 308:27; M”A 308:19; M”B 308:35
 as opposed to food which will be explained next
 Thus if the merchandise is even at times used by the owner, then it is no longer MMC”K and is rather like the status of merchandise described in 308:3. This ruling is implied specifically in Admur, as the Shulchan Aruch simply writes “particular” rather than “particular to not use at all for any other purpose” as writes Admur thus leaving room for question. This ruling follows the ruling of the Chazon Ish 42:16; Divrei Yoel 19, in contrast to the ruling of the Avnei Nezer 402 which differentiates between whether it’s used as a normal object or used only in rare times.
 As opposed to Melachto Leheter. So rules Admur in 308:4, and so rules Ketzos Hashulchan 108:13; Minchas Shabbos 308:2; SSH”K 20:19. Regarding expensive decorations-See Q&A!
 Admur 308:4
 Chapter 310 Halacha 12 following the stringent opinion there.
 Admur 308:2, and chapter 310 Halacha 1
 Chapter 310 Halacha 2-3
 Halacha 4
 (in 308:4 implies before night- however in 308:27 it says explicitly before Bein Hashmashos which is right after Shekiah)
 Above Halacha 5-6
 Ketzos Hashulchan Badei Hashulchan-13
 Chapter 310 Halacha 12. This applies even today although we tend to use our wallets for items other than money, nevertheless since these items too are Muktzah as they are usually all of importance and cannot be read on Shabbos, therefore the wallet remains Muktzah even when empty. However if in truth one also designated his wallet to be used for non-Muktzah items, such as pictures and the like, then when the wallet is empty it would not be Muktzah. [Elya Raba 310:10; Beis Meir; M”B 310:27]
 Chapter 310 Halacha 13
 Chapter 308 Halacha 6
 Admur 308:59
 Rav SZ”A in SSH”K 2:22 [although in footnote concludes with Tzaruch Iyun]; Hakashrus 1:8
The reason: As one is particular not to use the Pesach vessels throughout the year.
 Admur 331:10
 Background: From M”A ]308:2[ and Alter Rebbe ]308:6[ it implies that the assessment is in accordance with the local place one is in, whether their nature is to be careful with such items or not. However in M”B [308:6] and PM”G 308 A”A 2 he explains the M”A to mean that it goes according to each person’s individually. So too in Kaf Hachaim (310:14) learns in M”A that the term “mikomo” is not meant literally but rather it goes according to each individual. A support of this can possibly be brought from 310:89 which mentions with regards to items that to a rich person would serve no use (and therefore be Muktzah) but to a poor person would have a use that one goes in accordance with the owner of the object. Therefore we see that we judge on individual basis and not in accordance to the general practice of a city.
 P”M 308 A”A 2; M”B 308:6
 Implication of Poskim ibid that write “for him” and so is implied from 308:89 regarding the item of a pauper, that it is Muktzah for the wealthy even though it is not Muktzah for the owner.
 As ruled in 308:89 and Michaber 308:52 that if an item is Muktzah for the owner then it is Muktzah for the entire world.
 Which is forbidden to be used for on Shabbos, meaning that the vessel is MM”I.
 Toras Shabbos 308 footnote 2; Az Nidbaru 11:21; SSH”K 20 as is evident from the examples there; Rav Farkash via phone call; Piskeiy Teshuvos 308:1; Regarding the opinion of Admur, see next footnote! The M”B on 308:1 completely omits the explanation of the M,”A regarding expense.
 Support that the main thing is expense: In 308:4 Admur mentions the term “very expensive” when defining Muktzah Machmas Chesron Kis by Keilim Shemilachtam L’issur. This is likewise ruled by Rav Avraham Chaim Naah in Ketzos Hashulchan (108:13) which defines MMC”K by Melachto Liisur vessels, to specifically expensive vessels. The source for this is in the Magen Avraham (308:3) who differentiates between merchandise standing to be sold that the value is irrelevant and regular objects of which it depends on the value.
Support that the main thing is ones avoiding to use the object:
-Merchandise need not be expensive: The fact that by merchandise the price is irrelevant while by Keli sh’milachto L’issur we say it must be expensive leads one to say that the term “expensive” is only a general term used to define objects that one is careful not to use for other things due to possible loss. (see Aruch Hashulchan 308:11 who gives such an explanation, however he still says if it’s cheap then it isn’t Ch”k.) However according to this explanation then why mention the word expensive at all- being that expense is not the definition, just say that any item which is l’issur and one is careful against using it for anything else because it may get damaged- irrelevant of it’s worth, is Ch”k. i.e. if the definition of Ch”k is how careful one is with it then expense shouldn’t be mentioned and if it’s expense and hakpada then why by merchandise does expense not count.
-A wallet: The case regarding a wallet [mentioned above in A] is seemingly dealing with an inexpensive item and nevertheless Admur rules stringently that it is defined as MMC”K. This thus implies that the main factor is not actual worth. However perhaps setting it aside to a specific place is the determining factor in that case, and thus it cannot be used as a proof that all non-expensive items which one is particular on is considered MMC”K
-Paper: Although the Alter Rebbe writes in 308:6 [brought in D] that paper is Chisaron Kis, nevertheless there are those that say, at that time paper was expensive- unlike today, and thus cannot be brought as a decisive proof for this answer.
Practically: Shemiras Shabbos Kihelchasa (SS”K) (20:19), rules that today paper is Ch”k however it contradicts itself by having stated earlier (in 20:5) that it isn’t (by examples of milachto l’issur). Nevertheless from other examples mentioned therein SS“K, it is evident they learned the definition of Ch”k is not expense but rather the person taking special care not to use it for anything else out of fear of damage. This is based on Mishnah Berurah (M”B). I asked Harav Yekusial Farkash and he agreed with this view as well.
 Piskeiy Teshuvos 308:1
 Az Nidbaru 11:21; Igros Moshe 4:72; SSH”K 20:19
 Shevet Halevi 9:78; Shulchan Shlomo 308:4; Shalmei Yehudah brought in name of Rav Elyashiv, brought in Piskeiy Teshuvos 308:1
 Az Nidbaru ibid
 Chelkas Yaakov 2:148
 SSH”K 20:84 in name of RSZ”A
 Igros Moshe 4:72
 Piskeiy Teshuvos 308:2
Argument to say is Muktzah: In Admur 310:2 he rules based on M”A 310:5 that a wallet is similar to MMCK since one is careful with it and designates for it a specific place. Accordingly the Mishnah Berurah in 308:8 and 501:1 rules that a vessel, or wood for building, is Muktzah if it is designated to a specific place and one is particular not to sue it lest it become damaged. Based on this, Shmiras Shabbos Kihilchasa writes that any expensive item which one designates a specific, such as a wallet, closet, expensive picture or clock place, is chisoren kis. As for the reason why specifying a place should make it Muktzah, one can say that it is an action proving that one is careful against using it for anything else. Meaning, if one specifies a place for it and avoids moving it due to fear of damage it shows that for him that object is chisoren kis. However what is still unclear is why the Alter Rebbe only considers this similar to Chisoren kis and not actually. Perhaps one can say that since the example used there was a wallet which is not “very expensive” it isn’t a true chisoren kis since the loss isn’t that great. However being that the individual is careful not to use it for anything else, it receives the same Halachic status as a chisoren kis item. In accordance to this we can also explain the reason why very expensive was mentioned is because that is the true definition of chisoren kis. However nevertheless even a non-expensive item can become Muktzah through one treating it carefully like a very expensive item.
Argument to say is not Muktzah: As perhaps only in the case of 310:12 that discussed a wallet which is designated to be used for money do we say that it becomes MMCK as in truth the wallet is in considered MMI due to its exclusive usage for Muktzah, and hence it becomes Muktzah when designated for a specific spot. However other items which are not designated for any Muktzah use would remain permitted even.
 M”B 308:8; 308:168 and 501:1 [That any item that is not moved due to Hakpada is considered Muktzah MC”K] Az Nidbaru 11:21; Beir Moshe 8:70; SSH”K 20:22 and 28:27 regarding moving a clock and picture.
 Tehila Ledavid 336:6; Toras Shabbos 308:2; Ketzos Hashulchan 121 footnote 4; Rav SZ”A in SSH”K 20 footnote 214
Tehila Ledavid 336:6 states that vessles of decoration are not Muktzah as it is not a Keli Shemilachto Leissur and is hence similar to jewelry, however he concludes with a Tzaruch Iyun. The Toras Shabbos 308 footnote 2 regarding a silver goblet [however perhaps he is referring to a goblet which is at times used]; The Ketzos Hashulchan 121 footnote 4 states that a fish aquarium in ones house does not have a Muktzah status being that it is made for decoration. This implies that a decorative item is considered an object with a permissible use which is not Muktzah. Meaning, wall pictures and a closet would be permissible to move; Rav SZ”A 20 footnote 214 states that expensive candlesticks that are used also for decoration is not Muktzah
 See Admur 308:4 that MMCK only applies if the item is MM”I, unless it is merchandice in which case it is MMCK even if it is not an MMI. See also 310:12 that a money bed is similar to MMCK being that one is Makpid and designates it a specific area. See background below.
 Piskeiy Teshuvos ibid learns that according to Admur 308:4 it is not Muktzah as it is not a MM”I; Beir Moshe ibid states on the contrary that according to Admur 308:4 it is Muktzah as it is exactly similar to merchandice. In my opinion, no conclusive ruling can be brought from Admur to either side, as one can argue that since I has no actual phsycial usage it is similar to merchandice and should be MMCK, and one can argue that simply looking at it is considered its usage and hence it is a Keli Shemilachto Liheter that ahs a permitted use on Shabbos and hence cannot become MMC”K. Hence this returns us back to the dispute above regarding this matter, and no inference can be brought from Admur for either side.
 Kanah Bosem 18; Az Nidbaru 2:51
 M”B 308:168 [M”B 308:8 implies from his ruling that a book case is Muktzah MC”K, that here too the clock would be MMC”K]; Beir Moshe 8:70; SSH”K 20:22 regarding moving a clock and picture.
 Piskeiy Teshuvos 308:2. However see footnote there.
 308:88; Ketzos Hashulchan 108 footnote 3. See Halacha 5 in the Examples there!
 M”B 308:8 as is implied from his ruling that a book case is Muktzah MC”K; SSH”K 20:22
 Piskeiy Teshuvos 308:2. However see footnote there.
 Piskeiy Teshuvos 444:2, and Shemiras Shabbos Kihilchasa 20:22
 Piskeiy Teshuvos ibid; See following footnote.
 Peri Megadim A”A 308:10 and 444 A”A 1. However the Ashel Avraham Butshesh end of 308 rules that even these Matzos are not Muktzah as they can be fed to kids see there! He implies that food never becomes Muktzah. Vetzaruch Iyun.
Their reason: “Because it is forbidden to eat it on Erev Pesach, and one is particular against giving it to ones kids and he like, and it thus does not have the status of food”
The explanation: Seemingly this is compared to foods [Halacha 68 regarding meat as well as Halacha 9 regarding general foods that are only temporarily forbidden to eat] which are not fit or allowed to be eaten by humans on Shabbos, and thus since one does not plan to give it to dogs it has no use on Shabbos and is Muktzah. So too here since one may not eat the Matzah himself it is considered as if it is inedible to him, and since he is particular not to give it to anyone else it is considered to have no use and is Muktzah. However according to this it is not Muktzah because of Chisaron Kis but because they do not have the status of a vessel as is the law by meat, and so writes the Peri Megadim explicitly in 308:10 that they ”do not have the status of food”. Another reason that it is illogical to consider them Chisaron kis is based on chapter 310 Halacha 2 which rules explicitly that by food we do not entertain whether or not one is particular to give it to others. If it is fit to eat, then it is not Muktzah. [However see Ashel Avraham ibid which gives such a suggestion.] It is thus a wonderment on the SSH”K 20:22 and Piskeiy Teshuvos ibid, and other Melaktim that say the P”M holds its considered MMCK!
However Question: 1) It is explained in Halacha 89 that wine to a Nazir is not Muktzah since it is Kosher for other people and does not mention that this only applies in a case that the Nazir does not mind to give it to someone’s to drink. Why then do we not say the same thing here that since it can be eaten by children it is not considered Muktzah? [As the above Halachas mentioned as proof for this ruling all discuss foods that are not fit for any human 2) Based on the above, all Matzas that are very expensive and one does not plan to give to his kids should be considered inedible foods on Erev Pesach that falls on Shabbos and be Muktzah, even if they are not designated for the Seder night.
Perhaps the following then is the explanation: Only Matzah that has the full definition of Matzahs Mitzvah is considered Muktzah. Meaning only the 3 Matzahs that were baked on Erev Pesach past midday with all the required customs [see chapter 458] are Muktzah. As these Matzahs according to the law based on the custom must be used by the Seder night, and thus Halachicly are not fit to be given to the kids, and are thus considered like any food that is not edible. However all other Matzos, since they are Halachicly edible by other humans are not Muktzah. Thus according to this, today that many people do not ever buy Matzos Mitzvah baked on Erev Pesach, then all their Matzahs are not Muktzah, even if they personally decided to designate three Matzahs that they bought to be used for the Seder, as nevertheless Halachicly they are fit to be eaten by other humans. However if one only has three Shemurah Matzos, or a total of tree matzos [even when including the non-Shemurah Matzah] then according to above these three Matzos would be Muktzah as he must save them for Pesach night.
To conclude Lihalacha Vilo Limaaseh: Matzos Mitzvah are considered Muktzah Machmas Gufo and not Chisaron Kis. Only Matzos Mitzvah baked on Erev Pesach etc, are considered Matzos Mitzvah, unless one only has three [shemurah] Matzos.
 However Tzaruch Iyun from Ashel Avraham Butshesh end of 308 which implies that food never becomes Muktzah. Vetzaruch Iyun.
 The reason: The reason for this is because children who do not understand the concept of leaving Egypt may be fed matzos on Erev Pesach, and thus the Matzos are fit for them to eat. See previous footnote which explains this to mean that since children are Halachicly allowed to eat the Matzos, it is thus not Muktzah even if one is particular against giving them the Matzoth for whatever reason. Thus even a family that does not have kids, nevertheless since kids are commonly found it is not considered Muktzah, as explained in 308:64.
 Seemingly it is not Muktzah as a) It is only a custom not to eat them and not an actual prohibition. And b) these Matzas may be given to children to eat even according to the above custom. And c) As explained above only the Matzos baked on Erev Pesach are defined as Matzos Mitzvah which are Muktzah.
 SSH”K 20 footnote 75 in the name of Rav Shlomo Zalman Aurbach that it is Muktzah, and has the status of Chisaron Kis. However he concludes there with a Tzaruch Iyun.
 His reason: Because one is particular to not use the Sefer Torah for any other purpose due to its holiness, and thus it now has no use.
 SSH”K 20 footnote 75 new edition.
As they are no different than Tefillin which in essence should also be considered MMC”K and is not due to its status as Sifreiy Kodesh, and hence may be moved for its use. [See Tosefes Shabbos 308:21]
 Yoreh Deah 279:1 and 4; Shaareiy Halacha Uminhag 3:118
As if it is fixable, one must fix it within thirty days. If the Sefer Torah is not fixable, it is to be placed in Geniza. [ibid]
 The Rebbe [ibid] has questioned the source of deliberately leaving a Pasul Sefer Torah in the Aron in order to dance with it on Simchas Torah, as opposed to placing it in Geniza.
 On the one hand since it is designated to be sold, its main purpose is for a prohibited matter-selling, and thus should ideally be considered under the category of vessels that are designated for a prohibited use, which may not be moved to save them from damage, as will be explained in Halacha 12. However this requires further study, as if so then why didn’t the Alter Rebbe explicitly mention this, as he did by the category of Muktzah Machmas Mius.
 Az Nidbaru 11:21
 The same applies for all other books which are permitted to be read on Shabbos which have been designated for editing. See Halacha 5 I
 Toldos Shmuel 3:99-16, brought in SSH”K 20 footnote 44; Piskeiy Teshuvos 310:1.
 As we do not suspect that one may come to find an area that needs editing and come to edit it
 As it is forbidden to prepare on Shabbos for matters that may only be done after Shabbos.
 Based on Shut Radbaz brought in Sharreiy Teshuva 307:1; so rules SSH”K 20:18; Hisorerus Teshuva 2:165; Tzitz Eliezer 10:21; Az Nidbaru 7:8
 Kinyan Torah 2:115 and other Poskim brought in Piskeiy Teshuvos 307:1
 Pashut, and so rules Piskeiy Teshuvos 307 footnote 2
 SSH”K 20:21 in name of Rav SZ”A.
 However Tzaruch Iyun from Ashel Avraham Butchatch end of 308 which implies that food never becomes Muktzah. Vetzaruch Iyun.
 Rama 658:2
 Seder Birchas Hanehnin 11:8
 Rama 658:2; This applies even in accordance to the ruling of Admur in Seder ibid that one may not smell the fruit even on Shabbos, as the reason for forbidding the smell is because there is a doubt as to whether one is required to say a blessing. However according to all there is no prohibition in smelling it. Hence on Shabbos one may make a blessing on the smell of another fruit and then smell the Esrog. Therefore the Esrog is not Muktzah. [Mishneh Berurah 658:5]
 As they are designated for smelling and may be smelled on Shabbos. [See Michaber 653:1 and Sharreiy Tziyon 658:2]
 M”B 658:3
 Rama 658:2; M”B 658:3
 The reason: As they serve absolutely no use on Shabbos. This is unlike a Shofar which is MM”I as nevertheless it does still have some use on Shabbos, as it is a formed vessel. [M”B ibid]
 M”B 558:4 in name of Mamar Mordechai; Chemed Moshe; Tosefes Shabbos and so is implied from Admur 308:6 which rules that paper reverts back to MM”G if one is particular not to use it for any other purpose,
The reason: As they serve absolutely no use on Shabbos. This is unlike a Shofar which is MM”I as nevertheless it does still have some use on Shabbos, as it is a formed vessel. [M”B ibid]
Other Poskim: Some Poskim rule that a Lulav has the status of MMI and is hence permitted to be moved for its space and use on Shabbos, just like the law by Shofar. [Taz 658:3]
According to the opinion that a possul sefer Torah is muktzah, if one were to discover that the sefer Torah is possul in the middle of krias hatorah, he would be unable to close it or to remove it from the bima! Should one simply leave it open on the bima until after Shabbos?