what exactly is the difference between r. yehudah and r. shimon?
both have yoshev umetzapeh .and both have muktzeh...
It is true that both hold that there is a concept of Muktzeh. However, the word Muktzah is a very broad term (see end of Milchamos 20b in the Dafei ha'Rif).
There are some categories of Muktzeh which only Rebbi Yehudah holds are categories of Muktzah, not Rebbi Shimon. For example, the Gemara here says that Rebbi Yehuda understands that there is a concept of Muktzah Machmas Mius, which Rebbi Shimon clearly does not define as Muktzah. This is why we find statements from the Amoraim which start off by saying "Ain Muktzah l'Rebbi Shimon Ela..." -- "There is no Muktzah according to Rebbi Shimon besides...." The discussions of many Gemaros throughout Shabbos are based on these differences.
All the best,
Yaakov Montrose
Thank you for your answer.
1) What is the difference between muktzah machmas mius and graf shel rei?
(does Rebbi Yehudah allow the moving of graf shel rei?)
2) what is the reason (hesber) for why Rebbi Shimon allows the moving of muktzeh machmas mius and Rebbi Yehudah does not?
-perhaps it is because Rebbi Yehudah holds that a person is Maktzeh this kind of thing and Rebbi Shimon does not? if yes: is this a psychological machlokes? But there are different kind of people- some stingy some spendthrifts...some hoarders some throw things out...nosato d'vorecho l'shiurim? Some will maktzeh something (ie:mius) and some will not? and even Rebbi Shimon holds of muktzeh which is maktzeh b'yodayim! so why would he not Maktzeh something that is miusdik? Perhaps Rebbi Shimon is only maktzeh things which he is Makzeh b'yodayim? But a healthy cow (according to one shitah in Rebbi Shimon) that was not sick and died on Shabbos is muktzeh and he was not maktzeh b'yodayim? ...
In the answer above that the difference between Rebbi Yehudah and Rebbi Shimon is the "kind" of Muktzah--the answer implies that within a kind there is no machlokes.
In the original question I pointed out that Rebbi Yehudah also has "yoshev umetzapeh".
So the machlokes is not only in "kind" of muktzeh but "how much of a yoshev umetzapeh do you need? Rebbi Shimon agrees that a 25hr candle is muktzeh bc he is not yoshev umetzapeh; a healthy cow (according to one shitah in Rrebbi Shimon) is muktzeh!
If the machlokes "is", "how much yoshev umetzapeh do you need to make something muktzeh"--the machlokes is very subtle.
A K'tivah V'chatimah Tovah/A git gebentched yuhr fur alleh Yidden!
The Ramban (154a) differentiates, according to Rebbi Shimon, between something which is disgusting which can nonetheless be used to cover Keilim, and something which is disgusting which would not be used to cover Keilim. This logic is also hinted at by Tosfos (46a, DH "d'Nafta").
Though they do not directly address this question, this explanation could be the key to the difference between Rebbi Shimon and Rebbi Yehudah. Rebbi Yehudah looks at the disgusting aspect as overriding its usefulness, whereas Rebbi Shimon says that usefulness overrides being disgusting. When something is not useful at all and it is disgusting, it is called Graf Shel Re'i. Although some things might be physically able to be used to cover a Kli, no one would actually use a Graf Shel Rei to cover Keilim, as opposed to a Ner of Cheres (or even Nafta according to the Ramban). This would avoid all of the questions that you asked above based on the assumption that this is a psychological argument.
You are correct that the Machlokes between Rebbi Shimon and Rebbi Yehudah is also sometimes within categories of Muktzah. I did not go into that topic because I thought that you merely wanted a basic difference between Rebbi Yehudah and Rebbi Shimon.
Gmar Chasimah Tovah,
Yaakov Montrose
The fact that even R. Shimon holds that a Naft(alene) lamp is muktzeh--probably bc it is mius-dik, shows that the machlokes between R. Shimon and R. Yehudah is not the type of mius ("category" as was proposed ) but rather the degree.
The Ramban (154a) differentiates according to Rebbi Shimon between something which is disgusting which can nonetheless be used to cover Keilim, and something which is disgusting which would not be used to cover Keilim. This logic is also hinted at by Tosfos (46a, DH "d'Nafta"). Though they do not directly address this question, this explanation could be the key to the difference between Rebbi Shimon and Rebbi Yehudah. Rebbi Yehudah looks at the disgusting aspect as overriding its usefulness, whereas Rebbi Shimon says that usefulness overrides being disgusting. When something is not useful at all and it is disgusting, it is called Graf Shel Re'i. Although some things might be physically able to be used to cover a Kli, noone would actually use an actual Graf Shel Rei to cover Keilim, as opposed to a Ner of Cheres (or even Nafta according to the Ramban). This would avoid all of the questions that you asked above based on the assumption that this is a psychological argument.
You are correct that the Machlokes between Rebbi Shimon and Rebbi Yehudah is also sometimes within categories of Muktzah. I did not go into that topic because I thought that you merely wanted a basic difference between Rebbi Yehudah and Rebbi Shimon.
Regarding Nafta, there is a large argument among the Rishonim regarding what exactly Rebbi Shimon holds (i.e. the Tosfos and Ramban above argue). However, I do not know of anyone who says what you suggested (in a previous letter) that Rebbi Shimon actually holds it is Muktzah because he holds of Muktzah Machmas Mius.
Gmar Chasimah Tovah,
Yaakov Montrose
Look at tosfos 46a d'h d'nefto--next to last line, "d'nefto ossur afilu l'rebi Shimon d'mois t'fei miner yoshon..." this sounds like he is assoring bc it is mois... the Tos' goes on to compare the shita of Rabboh and rav Yosseph who hold that it is not* mois. btw I heard that the monoh that Naft smelling keili is good to cover is a bottle of Naft!
this tos' also seems to say that the machlokes in whether an object is muktzeh or not is "degree" not "type" of muktzeh.
There are two ways to look at this Tosfos. One, as you have suggested, is that when Tosfos says that Rebbi Shimon holds that Nefta is "Mais Tefei mi'Ner Yoshon", he means that Rebbi Shimon holds of Muktzah Machmas Mius. The other is as I suggested earlier, that Mais Tefei changes the category of Muktzah to Machmas Gufo.
I understand your Diyuk from Tosfos, but I think that it is an overwhelming Diyuk that the Gemara and Rishonim do not speak out that Rebbi Shimon in fact holds of Rebbi Yehuda's Muktzah Machmas Mius, but to a different degree. Additionally, the Ritva here explains that "Rebbi Shimon permits Muktzah Machmas Mius, and even so forbids Nefta because it is very Mais." The Ritva says that this is also the opinion of Rashi and Tosfos. According to your understanding, the Ritva should have said that Rebbi Shimon only holds of Muktzah Machmas Mius by something which is Mais Tefei. This would be more accurate.
This leads me to believe that the argument (in this case) is in category, not in degree of Muktzah, as I explained above. However, I would not be surprised if someone in fact would learn otherwise.
All the best,
Yaakov Montrose