[Avodah] Hanaah from Chametz

[Zev Sero]

On 31/01/2013 5:46 PM, Micha Berger wrote:

>> A possible chiluk: your hana'ah, to the extent that you have any, is from
>> handing him the box, not the contents; it would be the same regardless of
>> what the contents were.  He could just as easily have asked you to hand
>> down a box of matzah, or a roll of toilet paper.

> And the animal could just as well been given non-chameitz feed. The
> hana'ah isn't from the wheat -- had you found rice based food you would
> have been just as glad.

However, your intention is specifically for the food; the hana'ah you get
(such as it is) is from the dog being *fed*, not just being given an object.
If the dog were for some reason not able toeat what you had given it, you
would not achieve your goal.  So if it happens to be chametz it's easy to
see how your hana'ah is coming from chametz.  But here you don't care what
is in the box.  Your hana'ah (again such as it is) is merely from handing
the box to the person, and it makes no difference to you what it contains.
For all you care it could even be empty.  That in this case it happens to
contain edible chametz doesn't is therefore arguably irrelevant to your
hana'ah.


> Second issur: it's not mei'ever lanahar so it's not lifnei iveir, but
> isn't it mesayei'ah?

Mesayeia` what?  The chametz is perfectly muttar to the other shopper.
Why shouldn't you help him buy it?


>  "It's the very inclination to help another Jew [...]
> If the conversation goes well, maybe you'll have a guest for a Shabbos
> ch"m meal!

We're talking about a non-Jewish shopper, so this doesn't arise.

-- 
Zev Sero               A citizen may not be required to offer a 'good and
zev at sero.name          substantial reason' why he should be permitted to
                        exercise his rights. The right's existence is all
                        the reason he needs.
                            - Judge Benson E. Legg, Woollard v. Sheridan