[Avodah] Mutzkeh: Sticks, Stones, and Pets

[Zev Sero]

kennethgmiller at juno.com wrote:

> That's why the checker piece is no longer muktzeh: Because although it *is* a stone, I no longer *relate* to it as a stone. But the stones my son brought back from Yerushlayim *are* stones, and I will always relate to them as stones, and so they remain muktzeh, no matter how much I might want to insist that they are "souvenirs".
> 
> So too for pets. Yes, one can easily argue that a pet is a sort of toy. But it never stops being an animal. Like my stones, it cannot get away from its identity - being a living animal is precisely what makes the pet such an enjoyable toy. In order for eitzim v'avanim to stop being muktzeh, one must give it a *new* identity, and that has not happened for a pet, which must remain muktzeh.

But *why* are stones and animals muktzeh?  Because they have no legitimate
use.  These stones and animals do have a use, if you call playing with them
a use (and if you don't then why aren't the checkers muktzeh too?).  So it
shouldn't be enough to say "they remain stones and animals".


-- 
Zev Sero               Something has gone seriously awry with this Court's
zev at sero.name          interpretation of the Constitution.
                       	                          - Clarence Thomas