[Avodah] hilchot pesach

Zev Sero zev at sero.name
Mon Apr 2 08:41:20 PDT 2012


On 1/04/2012 10:52 AM, Eli Turkel wrote:
>>This could be got around very simply, by having the goy stipulate that he
>> gives permission for people to help themselves to his chametz after Pesach.

> In fact this is part of the standard contract. The only problem is that one
> should pay for the whiskey used. This is easy if one personally sold whiskey,
> harder in a mass sale. Thus, the problem is more a monetary problem but that
> is still not a heter.

I don't see the problem even in a mass sale. The goy is going to sell it
all back to us after Shabbat anyway, and we are going to pay for it then.
So if he gives permission, either explicitly or even implicitly, why
should we not take it early? We've discussed eating something while in
the queue at the supermarket, and whether the owner is or is not makpid,
or indeed is happy for people to do it because it guarantees a sale.
But I don't think there can possibly be any question that where the
owner has explicitly given permission then it is permitted! So what's the
difference here? Let him give permission, and all problems are solved.
When we pay for it after Shabbat, we will include in the repurchase all
that we took over the course of shabbat.


On 2/04/2012 6:55 AM, Danny Schoemann wrote:
>> This could be got around very simply, by having the goy stipulate that he
>> gives permission for people to help themselves to his chametz after Pesach.

> R' Dovid A. Morgenstern shlita [...]  mentioned that there would be a
> problem with Muktza, since Bein haShmoshos the Chametz is forbidden.

I don't see the problem. Even on Pesach itself, if the goy comes to
collect his property you are allowed to pick it up and give it to him.
And of course the goy himself can pick it up and do whatever he likes
with it. So how was it muktzeh?

> He also mentioned the issue of stealing from the Goy - since (the sales
> he is aware of) do not have any stipulations attached; he said they were
> complicated enough without adding loopholes.

As I've said before, I don't think this is a problem at all, just as I
don't think there's a problem with eating in the queue at the supermarket,
since there is a very strong umdena that the owner doesn't mind. But I
also don't see the problem with adding an explicit stipulation to the
contract, which would surely resolve any safek.

-- 
Zev Sero
zev at sero.name



More information about the Avodah mailing list